EconTalk Adam Mastroianni on Peer Review and the Academic Kitchen
19 snips
Feb 13, 2023 
Adam Mastroianni, a postdoctoral research scholar at Columbia University and author of the Substack newsletter Experimental History, critiques the peer review process, declaring it a failed experiment. He discusses how major errors slip through while replicable papers often don’t get published. Mastroianni suggests that instead of fixing peer review, a complete rethinking is necessary. He emphasizes the importance of better incentives and advocates for a shift toward more impactful, accessible research that prioritizes quality over quantity.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Peer Review: A Recent Experiment
- Peer review, while seemingly established, is a relatively recent practice in science, becoming widespread only in the mid-20th century.
- Before that, scientific communication was more diverse, involving letters, news-style reports, and association-linked journals with different incentives.
Journal Tiers and Status
- Journal tier matters little for practical application of research, focusing instead on status within academia.
- The focus should be on content and findings rather than the publication venue.
Peer Review's Failure to Catch Errors
- Studies show that peer review often fails to catch major errors, even deliberately inserted ones.
- Fraudulent papers are typically discovered post-publication, often by individuals within the same field.