4 ms·

I'm not sure that's true. I'm a researcher and at least among the younger generation of researchers, the anonymous peer review system often results in "oh shit"

I'm not sure that's true. I'm a researcher and at least among the younger generation of researchers, the anonymous peer review system often results in "oh shit" moments where you get a paper to review that you have to begrudgingly admit is good and recommend for publication, even though it makes some of your work invalid. That's just one persons experience though, I have come across proud professors (and reviewers of my own papers) who seem to let pride come before professionalism. Peer review should also be blind. Too often a famous name can get papers published that would not be published otherwise.

flipchart 13y ago
It's awesome that you stick to the moral high road despite the consequences for your own work. I think that the problem may become more pronounced as the length of a researcher's career grows. Peer review should also be blind. Too often a famous name can get papers published that would not be published otherwise. Fully agree, although that only solves the problem of pushing through papers based on researcher merit (not the topic of rejecting papers on the basis of conflict with your own agenda)