Fair Rewards for Reviewers

Nov 20 at 10:00 AM CEST


What is considered an ‘acceptable’ reward for peer-review work will significantly vary between low- and high-income countries. So what should be a fair economic reward for a review? Do you think the journals should compensate reviewers and/or authors for their work? What would be the appropriate amount of economic compensation? What should the amount of rewards be to make sense to you as a scholar? Moreover, unfortunately “ghost reviewing” is still a common phenomenon which means that the recognition of reviewers may be difficult, so how can we make the reviewer reward system fair and equal?