Time-saving proposal to improve the reviewing process
Proposal: As an academic reviewer, you should always vote to publish a paper, without reading it, even if it is a tedious waste of time.
The time-saving benefit of this strategy is subtle to grasp but significant. You see, only the reviewers of a paper "must" read it, while everyone else will discard it if it's boring. By voting to publish, you waste no one else's time—but the time you save is your own. If every reviewer did this, the time saved would allow us all to do far more research!
Comments
Unfortunately, if the paper is seriously flawed, then some people may waste even more time trying to replicate something that doesn't work. So reviewers should perhaps at least do some checking ;)
Greetings from one of your Oregon summer school pals.
Posted by: Mathias Ricken | January 7, 2010 4:34 AM