12 ms·

The only reason the review process is politicized is because academic institutions compete for research money. Preventing your peer institutions from publishing

The only reason the review process is politicized is because academic institutions compete for research money. Preventing your peer institutions from publishing helps you get money for your own. You need to change how research is funded. Follow the money.

BurningFrog 7y ago
It's not the only reason. There is also the glory of being the genius leader in your field, and all the prizes, titles and lovers that come with it. > Preventing your peer institutions from publishing helps you get money for your own. You need to change how research is funded. Surely removing people's opportunity to veto their competitors publications is a more direct way!
thaumasiotes 7y ago
> The only reason the review process is politicized is because academic institutions compete for research money. Well, publication is also how researchers get promoted by people who can't evaluate their research. There's a within-department need outside of just attracting grants.
slavik81 7y ago
Politics have been part of the peer review process for a very, very long time. It's not all about the money, either: > Fourier was interested in heat propagation, and presented a paper in 1807 to the Institut de France on the use of sinusoids to represent temperature distributions. The paper contained the controversial claim that any continuous periodic signal could be represented as the sum of properly chosen sinusoidal waves. Among the reviewers were two of history's most famous mathematicians, Joseph Louis Lagrange (1736-1813), and Pierre Simon de Laplace (1749-1827). > While Laplace and the other reviewers voted to publish the paper, Lagrange adamantly protested. For nearly 50 years, Lagrange had insisted that such an approach could not be used to represent signals with corners, i.e., discontinuous slopes, such as in square waves. The Institut de France bowed to the prestige of Lagrange, and rejected Fourier's work. It was only after Lagrange died that the paper was finally published, some 15 years later. https://www.dspguide.com/ch8/1.htm https://www.dspguide.com/ch8/1.htm

BurningFrog 7y ago

It's not the only reason. There is also the glory of being the genius leader in your field, and all the prizes, titles and lovers that come with it. > Preventing your peer institutions from publishing helps you get money for your own. You need to change how research is funded. Surely removing people's opportunity to veto their competitors publications is a more direct way!

thaumasiotes 7y ago

> The only reason the review process is politicized is because academic institutions compete for research money. Well, publication is also how researchers get promoted by people who can't evaluate their research. There's a within-department need outside of just attracting grants.

slavik81 7y ago

Politics have been part of the peer review process for a very, very long time. It's not all about the money, either: > Fourier was interested in heat propagation, and presented a paper in 1807 to the Institut de France on the use of sinusoids to represent temperature distributions. The paper contained the controversial claim that any continuous periodic signal could be represented as the sum of properly chosen sinusoidal waves. Among the reviewers were two of history's most famous mathematicians, Joseph Louis Lagrange (1736-1813), and Pierre Simon de Laplace (1749-1827). > While Laplace and the other reviewers voted to publish the paper, Lagrange adamantly protested. For nearly 50 years, Lagrange had insisted that such an approach could not be used to represent signals with corners, i.e., discontinuous slopes, such as in square waves. The Institut de France bowed to the prestige of Lagrange, and rejected Fourier's work. It was only after Lagrange died that the paper was finally published, some 15 years later. https://www.dspguide.com/ch8/1.htm https://www.dspguide.com/ch8/1.htm