In praise of the referee
Nicolas Chopin (ENSAE, CREST), Andrew Gelman (Columbia University),, Kerrie L. Mengersen (Queensland University of Technology), and Christian P., Robert (Universite Paris-Dauphine, IUF, and CREST)

TL;DR
This paper emphasizes the crucial role of peer reviewers in scholarly publishing and explores potential reforms to better utilize their valuable contributions in the evolving publication landscape.
Contribution
It discusses innovative approaches to journal publication that leverage the efforts of peer reviewers more effectively.
Findings
Peer review significantly improves scientific papers.
Reforms can enhance the efficiency and fairness of peer review.
Valuable reviewer efforts should be better integrated into publication processes.
Abstract
There has been a lively debate in many fields, including statistics and related applied fields such as psychology and biomedical research, on possible reforms of the scholarly publishing system. Currently, referees contribute so much to improve scientific papers, both directly through constructive criticism and indirectly through the threat of rejection. We discuss ways in which new approaches to journal publication could continue to make use of the valuable efforts of peer reviewers.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMeta-analysis and systematic reviews · scientometrics and bibliometrics research
