Abstract
Key points Although ‘peer review’ has quasi‐sacred status, times are changing, and peer review is not necessarily a single and uniformly reliable gold standard. For publishers, peer review is a process not an outcome. Academics understand peer review, but are often ignorant about the quality checking mechanisms within wider publishing. Self‐publishing has led to the much wider availability of publishing services – these now being used by all stakeholders in publishing. How should universities evaluate comment and ideas that were first disseminated within a non‐academic market? Rather than an upper house, is peer review today more of a galley kitchen?
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
