OPENING PANDORA’S BOX: A CRITIQUE OF PEER REVIEW PROCESSES

Abstract

Publishing procedures in all scientific areas have been in constant flux to ensure articles’ formal unity and most importantly significant contribution to respective research fields. Scientists but more specifically higher education professionals across the globe have joined a race for “points” to warrant their standing in academic communities or to comply with promotion or tenure requirements. Publishing scientific/ academic work in high-ranking journals is today the norm in most universities worldwide which has imposed on editorial teams methods of selection relying almost exclusively on the authority of reviewers. This article will present a brief overview of recent concerns regarding the peer review practice in different publishing fields and the issue of less than collegial behaviours that have also emerged. The paper examines the importance of unbiased feedback of specialists which ensures the quality of published materials and highlights authors’ apprehension about bullying in peer review processes. The present critique will also mention the need for golden rules of conduct for peer reviewers and the necessity of editorial boards to supervise and address inappropriate aggressive comments from reviewers.