Publishing more than reviewing? Some ethical musings on the sustainability of the peer review process

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
File version
Accepted Manuscript (AM)
Author(s)
Lindebaum, D
Jordan, PJ
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2021
Size
File type(s)
Location
License
Abstract

Based on our editorial experience, and acknowledging the regular editor grievances about reviewer disengagement at professional meeting and conferences, in this article we argue that the review system is in need of significant repair. We argue that this has emerged because an audit culture in academia and individual incentives (like reduced teaching loads or publication bonuses) have eroded the willingness of individuals to engage in the collective enterprise of peer-reviewing each others’ work on a quid pro quo basis. In response to this, we emphasise why it is unethical for potential reviewers to disengage from the review process, and outline the implications for our profession if colleagues publish more than they review. Designed as a political intervention in response to reviewer disengagement, we aim to ‘politicise’ the review process and its consequences for the sustainability of the scholarly community. We propose three pathways towards greater reviewer engagement: (i) senior scholars setting the right kind of ‘reviewer’ example; (ii) journals introducing recognition awards to foster a healthy reviewer progression path and (iii) universities and accreditation bodies moving to explicitly recognise reviewing in workload models and evaluations. While all three proposals have merit, the latter point is especially powerful in fostering reviewer engagement as it aligns individual and institutional goals in ‘measurable’ ways. In this way, ironically, the audit culture can be subverted to address the imbalance between individual and collective goals.

Journal Title
Organization
Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume
Issue
Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Lindebaum, D; Jordan, PJ, Publishing more than reviewing? Some ethical musings on the sustainability of the peer review process, Organization, 2021. Copyright 2021 The Authors. Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications.
Rights Statement
Item Access Status
Note
This publication has been entered in Griffith Research Online as an advanced online version.
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject
Business information systems
Organisation and management theory
Business analytics
Persistent link to this record
Citation
Lindebaum, D; Jordan, PJ, Publishing more than reviewing? Some ethical musings on the sustainability of the peer review process, Organization, 2021
Collections