Peer review is broken. Paying referees could help fix it

This is severely disconnected with academic realities. To begin: who, specifically, is going to pay? whom? how much? under what conditions? but more broadly, the overarching problems are two: the decline of graduate advisors and more experienced colleagues modeling professional behavior that includes a moderate amount of responsible scholarly professional "service" in the form of reviewing within one's field of expertise. Correlatively, the decline of responsible editorial conduct. The other consequential factor is the rise of fake open access pay for play journals that do not actually review manuscripts Graduate and professional MUST be reconstructed. Period

While I agree that in a marketised and commercialised university system we should not work “for free" at all, I doubt that fees alone will fix the problem. The main problems are workloads and performance pressures (i.e., "grant capture" and "publish or perish" mantras), first and foremost. These pressures are exacerbated by financial woes and increased uncertainty for adjunct and temp staff, for sure. But the fundamental problem remains the same: too little time in a day and a week to meet all the competing and often conflicting demands on a modern-day academic. The change in professional ethos (or the lack of it) as mentioned by the above commenter are a factor too, but to me are a direct consequence of an academic system rewarding competitive self-interested or better “career-minded” behaviour rather than collaboration, altruistic service and good academic citizenship.

Academic publishing is a flawed business model. We academics work incredibly hard to undertake research, write, peer review and publish - all done for free. After that, we pay lot of money to get access to those knowledge..We teach how to run a business and the practice we adopt is on the contrary.

Glorified typesetters are extracting huge rents. Need to put a stop to it.

ScholarProVetting.com is designed to address this inequity.