Greetings, dear colleagues!
I have an unusual question related to publishing and reviewing ethics, and I am very curious about your opinion. Do you believe that reviewing papers for subscription, open-access, and hybrid journals without any monetary or other compensation falls within our work description and is one of our primary responsibilities as scientists? Or do you think it is already enough that we need to come up with ideas, perform research, write, publish, and, in addition to all of that, pay?
Most of the journals in my field charge between $3,000 and $5,000 for open-access publication. In my opinion, that budget should be more than enough to remunerate reviewers, at least with a symbolic amount of money.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this matter!
This question was discussed repeatedly here at ResearchGate:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why-the-article-reviewing-peer-review-in-Journal-and-Conference-is-a-voluntary-work/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_many_researchers_think_publishers_journals_should_pay_for_their_content_and_also_for_peer_review/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/If_there_is_ever_going_to_be_a_time_peer_reviewers_will_be_paid_for_their_services_the_time_is_now/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_journals_pay_for_peer_review_work/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_open-access_journals_reviewers_do_not_get_paid_for_their_job/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_dont_journals_pay_reviewers_and_still_sell_publications/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_dont_journals_pay_to_reviewers_as_they_bleed_authors_for_publication_fees/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Reviewers_participation_should_be_considered_too/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What-are-the-benefits-of-being-a-reviewer-for-a-journal/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Rewarding_the_work_of_the_referees/1
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Moral Philosophy
- Free Will