And it’s at the very root of the peer-review crisis, to the extent there is one: when academe’s shrinking share of securely employed professors compensated for work across teaching, research and ...

Throwing out the system — which deems whether research is robust and worth being published — would do more harm than good. But it makes sense to be aware of peer review’s potential weaknesses.

And some of these flawed studies do real harm. But even scholars who complain ... have alternate methods of communicating their findings. Peer review assures a reader that a journal article’s claim ...

Peer review is integral to a scholar’s journey, whether you’re trying to secure funding, present research at a conference, or publish your findings in a book or journal. Yet despite its ...

They’re also asking for triple damages to be awarded to themselves and anyone in the U.S. who has peer reviewed papers for the defendants’ journals since Sept. 12, 2020.

Although not technically part of peer review, a court may also consider the "impact factor" of the publication in which the study is reported, i.e., how often the journal is cited in other articles.

Journal editors do not expect peer review to ferret out cleverly concealed, deliberate deceptions. A peer reviewer can only evaluate what the authors chose to include in the manuscript.

Predatory journals may claim that they follow legitimate editorial and publishing practices but do not actually conduct peer review or such functions as archiving journal content, managing ...

The journals are absolutely right to worry; ChatGPT and, presumably, its A.I. successors yet to come represent a potential existential threat to the peer review process—a fundamental mechanism ...