Peer-reviewing tyranny

In social sciences, data, theories, and conclusions are mostly subjective, depending on context, moments — the moment of fieldwork and the theoretical moment, i.e. the framework in fashion — and methodology. Most in general social sciences are conservative, despite its capacity to build a liberal and equal measure for all social components. I mean, social sciences allow us to see a society as mutant landscape, but paradoxically, in what comes to reinvent themselves, social sciences remain conservative, disapproving new conceptualizations and methods.

Because researchers depend on journals and books to find their (our) work recognized, and since journals, criterial lays on double-blind peer-reviews, we know live a peer-review tyranny. In several cases, we are facing not suggestions in order to improve our paper but actually we changing the layout to match with peers’ reading desire. In the very end the paper is no longer our idea but a given theme text, very similar to what children do at school – “you must do a composition about your holidays”.

Cite this article as: João Ferreira Dias, "Peer-reviewing tyranny," in Adarrum, Setembro 14, 2017, https://jfdias.hypotheses.org/436.

One thought on “Peer-reviewing tyranny”

Deixe uma resposta

O seu endereço de email não será publicado. Campos obrigatórios marcados com *

Este site utiliza o Akismet para reduzir spam. Fica a saber como são processados os dados dos comentários.