

Editor quits journal over pay-for-expedited peer-review offer - p4bl0
http://news.sciencemag.org/scientific-community/2015/03/editor-quits-journal-over-pay-expedited-peer-review-offer

======
duncan_bayne
I'm guessing he wasn't an economist by profession then ;-) Seriously, this
seems like a great solution to the problem highlighted in the article - peer
review is a slow process when left to non market forces. Seems analogous to
hiring a consultant to review your code.

~~~
p4bl0
Sorry but no. You can't say that. This "solution" might solve something that
has been highlighted in the article, but who said it was a problem?

I'd rather have a very slow but _rigorous_ and _scientific_ review process
than what is offered here.

Good science should not care for a few month of review instead of a few weeks.
If the presented results seem important to the point of needing to be urgently
out there, you can always upload a preprint to arXiv or a similar repository
before or during the review process.

Paid for fast peer-reviewing is _WRONG_. It prioritizes the science done in
rich laboratories of the rich countries. That's not how science is supposed to
work. It's stupid to think that introducing this "market forces" into the
reviewing process won't have an effect on its output (and I'm not talking
about speed here).

~~~
duncan_bayne
> I'd rather have a very slow but rigorous and scientific review process than
> what is offered here.

Yes, but clearly, others disagree. They'd rather have rapid review and are
happy to pay for it.

Also, consider medical research. Quite literally, lives will be saved by
faster review.

