One issue is that reviewers themselves don’t get rated. They also don’t have any incentives to do quality reviews. I think StackOverflow model is the only one I

One issue is that reviewers themselves don’t get rated. They also don’t have any incentives to do quality reviews. I think StackOverflow model is the only one I know of which is able to scale this process. It’s not without flaws but it’s content usability and quality is extremely high than any other collaborative filtering model out there. Academic reviews can perhaps be scaled with similar model. Imagine each paper is question and each review is answer. People vote for which answers and questions were useful and everyone accumulates reputation that in turn can be used for career development. You can see everyone’s questions, answers and votes. People with enough karma gets moderator privileges to be able to knock off bad content. People will then have incentive to do the right thing, improve quality and avoid favoritism.