As a former academic I find this kind of behavior antithetical to the principle's of science. The scientific publishing industry is archaic and a burden on the progress of science. These journals are gatekeepers for both consumers and producers of public research. I've worked on some research projects that took nearly 2 years to get published after the all of the data collection and analysis had been already completed. The peer-review process can always be over-ridden by the editors and it is the editors who get to choose who reviews the research. So instead of having all of science practitioners to bear on work, it's a select group that an editor deems worthy. Despite all of our technology, the politics of control remain the same.
2 comments
[ 6.0 ms ] story [ 17.4 ms ] threadA reminder not to view anyone in Congress with less than a wholely critical eye.