2 ms·

It's a question of resources. Once a shill has been identified editors can reject them at the editorial stage without even sending it to the peer reviewers. If

• nickff 11y ago
  You seem to be describing a 'fruit of the poisonous tree' view of funding, and saying that studies funded by certain authors are right to be discounted.[1] For one thing, anonymous publication could serve to discourage partisan funding of studies, as the donor would no longer be able to verify the authorship of any given paper. The use of 'credibility' as a criteria for publication also creates large biases against novice scientists, or scientists from unusual backgrounds (scientific and otherwise). In addition, 'credible' scientists should never be given any benefit of the doubt; if someone depends on this, they are not doing good work. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree