aStructural and Chemical Biology, Institute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool Biosciences Bldg, Crown Street, L69 7ZB, UK
Received 17.10.2014, accepted 21.10.2014, published 23.10.2014
JUnQ, 5, 1, Views, XXX, 2015
In the last couple of years, partly because of my involvement in the stripy controversy (more below), I have thought a lot about publishing… and concluded (along with many other people) that the system is absurd, worse, toxic. Public funds are paid to commercial publishers to put publicly-funded research behind paywalls. The (unpaid) hard work of reviewers (which may or may not have led to improvements in the article) remains confidential and does not benefit the community. Publicly-funded researchers waste their time reviewing articles which have already been reviewed several times by other researchers for other journals. Researchers are evaluated on the impact factor of the journals in which they publish even though this is not at all a mea- surement of the quality of an article.[1,2] There is a serious reproducibility crisis but no incentive to reproduce or criticise published work. Those flaws and their consequences can be illustrated by briefly looking at two recent controversies.
The Article (and much more) is also available on Raphaël Lévys Blog