Search Results
7/21/2025, 6:13:24 AM
>>510941469
>You could have just said, “No I haven’t”
Robert Maxwell, a prominent figure in scientific publishing, is associated with transforming the academic publishing landscape in ways that raised concerns about the integrity and accessibility of the peer review process. By aggressively expanding Pergamon Press in the 1950s and 1960s, Maxwell capitalized on the lack of free-market principles in scientific publishing. He actively recruited scientists to create new journals, rapidly increasing the number of publications under his company. This expansion led to concerns about the commercialization of peer-reviewed science, as Maxwell's focus appeared to be on maximizing profits rather than ensuring the quality and accessibility of scientific knowledge.
One of the key criticisms of Maxwell's influence on peer review is that he helped establish a system where publishers became "kingmakers of science." Universities and libraries, funded by government money, were compelled to subscribe to an ever-growing number of journals, creating a cycle where publishers held significant power over which research was disseminated. This model raised concerns about the bottleneck in knowledge dissemination and the lack of accountability in the peer review process, as the system prioritized profit over public access to scientific knowledge.
Additionally, the legacy of Maxwell's publishing model has been linked to the current challenges in academic publishing, including the high costs of journal subscriptions and the push for open access. While open access has been proposed as a solution, the transition has not resolved concerns about the oligopoly of academic publishers or the role of peer review in maintaining scientific integrity. Instead, the commercial pressures introduced by figures like Maxwell have arguably contributed to ongoing issues in ensuring transparent, unbiased, and equitable peer review practices.
https://dovydas.com/blog/undoing-robert-maxwell
>You could have just said, “No I haven’t”
Robert Maxwell, a prominent figure in scientific publishing, is associated with transforming the academic publishing landscape in ways that raised concerns about the integrity and accessibility of the peer review process. By aggressively expanding Pergamon Press in the 1950s and 1960s, Maxwell capitalized on the lack of free-market principles in scientific publishing. He actively recruited scientists to create new journals, rapidly increasing the number of publications under his company. This expansion led to concerns about the commercialization of peer-reviewed science, as Maxwell's focus appeared to be on maximizing profits rather than ensuring the quality and accessibility of scientific knowledge.
One of the key criticisms of Maxwell's influence on peer review is that he helped establish a system where publishers became "kingmakers of science." Universities and libraries, funded by government money, were compelled to subscribe to an ever-growing number of journals, creating a cycle where publishers held significant power over which research was disseminated. This model raised concerns about the bottleneck in knowledge dissemination and the lack of accountability in the peer review process, as the system prioritized profit over public access to scientific knowledge.
Additionally, the legacy of Maxwell's publishing model has been linked to the current challenges in academic publishing, including the high costs of journal subscriptions and the push for open access. While open access has been proposed as a solution, the transition has not resolved concerns about the oligopoly of academic publishers or the role of peer review in maintaining scientific integrity. Instead, the commercial pressures introduced by figures like Maxwell have arguably contributed to ongoing issues in ensuring transparent, unbiased, and equitable peer review practices.
https://dovydas.com/blog/undoing-robert-maxwell
Page 1