We are discussing in other settings (in relation to the political affairs of science in Colombia and the world) the following:
1.How can the peer review system be more impartial with the papers of authors of small institutions?
2.Should the peer review system be hypercritical with publications with hypotheses inspired by controversial ideas?
3. If peer review is not open to experiments from small organizations that show results related to controversial ideas, this can be a problem. Reports from various researchers (not only from highly recognized researchers) are necessary in this case.
You don't need to worry. Just submit to a journal with high IF, and hope for the best!
preprint and post-publication review - the best way to handle nepotism, protectionism, plagiarism...
thank you...well, the context is very complex... for instance, see https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00235-w
minorities viewpoints, independent research and opinions of researchers of small institutions are very important for the diversity and impartiality of scientific journals...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Writing