Share Page
Post on LinkedIn
Copy URL to Clipboard
Copied!

Does peer review continue to be the best standard for ascertaining whether a manuscript is suitable for publication?

I am sure that all of us have encountered peer reviewers who are neither 'peers' in the true spirit of the word, or even good reviewers based on the quality of their reviews.  However, most (?almost all) journal editors are somewhat reluctant to look past a reviewers recommendation and exercise their editorial prerogative.  As a result, good research suffers! So what can be done? I don't have an answer but am looking for insightful comments/options. Thanks.     
Peer Review
Accepted, Highest Scores first Newest first
0
Dr. VVK
 I think peer review remains the best standard for ensuring a manuscript's suitability for publication because it controls quality, engages experts, and provides feedback for improvements. However, the process can involve bias, inconsistency, and delays in disseminating findings. It might take a long time, but to get something extraordinary, patience is the best key to get an excellent reward. 
0
Noel k
Surely , In my opinion the peer review will continue the best standards to ensure that the manuscript is suitable for publication because it is through the peer review that we (1)control the quality of the manuscript,(2)through the peer review, the expert in the filed are engaged, and (3)provision of feedback for improvements. However, the process may involve the bias, inconsistency from different reviewers as well as delay to disseminate the findings. 

Post an Answer

Sign In to Answer
Type
Public
Status
Published
Bounty
1 Ping Credit
Created
07/09/2025
Answer Count
2
Vote Count
0
Creator
Jaspreet S. Brar