Concern raised over payment for fast-track peer review

  title={Concern raised over payment for fast-track peer review},
  author={Daniel Cressey},
Scientist resigns from NPG’s Scientific Reports journal over pilot project. 
Threats to the Survival of the Author-Pays-Journal to Publish Model
Some challenges that may threaten the survival of the author-pays journal publishing model are discussed, evolving the “publish or perish” into a “pay to publish or perished” model.
Will Publons Popularize the Scientific Peer-Review Process?
Lately, I have been having trouble sleeping. There is something on my mind, something that I have been putting off for weeks and is long overdue. It is not what you might think. I have not missed a
Break Your Shackles! Emancipating Information Systems From The Tyranny of Peer Review
The paper presents the report of a panel that debated the review process in the information systems (IS) discipline at ICIS 2017 in Seoul, Korea and presents arguments for and against three proposals and a panel audience vote on the issues.
Why Academics Choose to Publish in a Mega-Journal.
The results have shown that a recommendation of a colleague is not only the main channel through which authors found out about the journal, but is also the major reason they decided to submit their paper to a mega-journal.
To what is the review process relevant? What’s right and what’s wrong with peer review for academic business journals
The purpose of this paper is to consider various strengths and weaknesses of the academic review process with an emphasis on the effect the process has on the relevance of business journals,
The answer is not 42.