Brandon S. Byers*, Thomas R. Dougherty*, and Uzuki Horo
Edited by Advait Athreya and Bertrand J. Neyhouse
Review | Aug. 31 2023
*Emails: firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com
- A historical exploration of the academic peer review process demonstrates evolved challenges in its implementation and presents how changes in incentives could facilitate improvements
- Market responses to peer review challenges are still in the development stages, suggesting the need for policies to ensure the integrity of scientific research while promoting open access, reproducibility, and transparency
- Four potential policy strategies for peer review (paid services, open services, standardization, and peer review tooling) underscore the potential to improve review quality, mitigate bottlenecks, and create a more transparent process
This MIT Science Policy Review article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/.