Just to want to mention that other threads dealing with topic already exists, see
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_think_reviewing_scientific_articles_should_remain_voluntary_or_should_the_reviewers_be_paid_by_the_publishers
and
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_we_abandon_the_anonymous_collegial_peer-review_system_for_scientific_publications_and_bring_in_professional_paid_reviewers_instead
and
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_a_reviewer_or_his_employer_be_compensated_for_article_evaluations
and more specific
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_should_be_the_basis_for_the_monetary_remuneration_of_article_reviewers
No, they should not. Otherwise a new breed of “reviewers” will develop, i.e. professional reviewers (low level of knowledge, high speed of writing). A new type of review will dominate: fast but mostly useless.
Just to want to mention that other threads dealing with topic already exists, see
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_think_reviewing_scientific_articles_should_remain_voluntary_or_should_the_reviewers_be_paid_by_the_publishers
and
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_we_abandon_the_anonymous_collegial_peer-review_system_for_scientific_publications_and_bring_in_professional_paid_reviewers_instead
and
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_a_reviewer_or_his_employer_be_compensated_for_article_evaluations
and more specific
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_should_be_the_basis_for_the_monetary_remuneration_of_article_reviewers
Aren't peer reviewers already "paid" for their reviews in a sense? Isn't the opportunity to be seen as someone of expertise, whose response to a theory or claim is desired in his/her field a form of nonmonetary compensation? In fact isn't this already tied to performing well (e.g. giving a very noteworthy review)? To be seen by one's peers as one of expertise in one's field, whose opinion is sought out and valued, seems to be its own reward.
I have already answered a similar question on RG ! Yes of course, each work done well and with sincerity, must be appreciated in one way or the other! Peer reviewer's job is a critical one, where one has to spend time and energy, concentrate on an article and take decisions on whether to add or delete something or to change something, so that the article becomes fit for publication ! Rewarding such a job is definitely something to be seriously thought about !! The reward may not only be in terms of remuneration but it can be in terms of acknowledgement or placing in editorial board or any similar gesture !!
No. That's the beauty of it. You wanna sometimes give away your knowledge without getting money in return.
If the community ever agrees on rewarding the reviewers, wouldn't it be better if these rewards are more academy-specific? Like giving the reviewers free access to otherwise paid databases, waving the publication fees, etc.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology