The article discusses significant issues in academic research publishing, highlighting the rising concerns about gatekeeping in scientific review processes. It outlines four proposed pillars for improvement: open access publishing, open peer reviewing, compensating reviewers, and eliminating acceptance/rejection protocols. However, while these reforms might increase access to knowledge, the author argues for maintaining some necessary gatekeeping to ensure publication quality. Additionally, a suggestion for a fifth pillar emphasizes reducing unnecessary analytical complexity in research to enhance public comprehension.
A recent article suggests that while removing gatekeeping in academic publishing can improve access, some form of gatekeeping remains essential for maintaining quality.
Kulldorff proposes four pillars for reforming the research publication process, including open access and peer reviewing; however, he overlooks the role of necessary gatekeeping.
The dialogue surrounding academic publishing is crucial as it not only affects researchers but also impacts public trust in science and the dissemination of knowledge.
A potential fifth pillar proposed is to simplify analytical complexity in research, ensuring that findings are accessible and understandable to a broader audience.
Collection
[
|
...
]