Peer Review, Open Access, and Other Publishing Scams

By Hauptman, Robert | Journal of Information Ethics, April 1, 2016 | Go to article overview

Peer Review, Open Access, and Other Publishing Scams


Hauptman, Robert, Journal of Information Ethics


Peer review is a controlling system that has been operative in the hard sciences for a very long time. Scholars in other disciplines in both the social sciences (psychology and everything else) and the humanities (art history and everything else as well) decided that what is good enough for physicists is good enough for them too. So now every journal editor must send submitted manuscripts out to reviewers (who may or may not be legitimate peers). These busy, hard-pressed academics (and unaffiliated scholars as well as corporate researchers) set to work reading, analyzing, evaluating (and sometimes stealing) the structure, content, and ideas put forth in the papers. Many, many months may pass before their assessment returns to the journal's editor who then must decide what to do based on the often contravening remarks. It is not impossible that so much time has passed that the paper demands revision regardless of the reviewers' comments.

When I founded JIE, I never considered using a peer review system because it is superfluous, inefficient, and wasteful. In most, though not all, cases, a competent editor can make a judicious decision without recourse to peers who have better things to do than to inefficiently and ineffectively read yet another paper. Perhaps if they were rewarded with monetary compensation or tenure or promotion they would do a better, swifter job. But it really matters very little, since they do not catch error or misconduct (fabrication, falsification, plagiary) and they do not fairly evaluate the paper's contribution (since the reviewers often hold contrary perspectives); what peer reviewers do do is to stifle innovation and creativity. The process is so riddled with problems that in most instances we would be better off without it.

Open access is an excellent analogue to peer review. Here we have the promise of inexpensive or free access to codified data, information, and even knowledge without a $20,000 yearly subscription burden for a single publication. And in some cases this probably works out well for everyone: author, publisher, and subscriber. But too often when one party benefits, another suffers, sometimes dramatically. In the distant past, a subscription to an excellent if expensive journal (especially in the hard sciences) cost a "reasonable" amount of money: libraries could purchase important, even crucial, publications for a few hundred dollars. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

Peer Review, Open Access, and Other Publishing Scams
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen
Items saved from this article
  • Highlights & Notes
  • Citations
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Search by... Author
    Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.