[lmc]

> paying the reviewers just seems like a bad idea? Reviewers need to be skeptical AF

Sorry, it's not obvious to me - how might payment for reviewers affect their decision making?

[thechao]

Let's be real: graduate students are not paid well. Even a modest payment scheme would be a dramatic boost in their income. What payment schedule would you use for review? By paper? By journal? If it's "by paper" then the students will be motivated to churn through the papers to get paid. I'm not sure what the incentive structure is there, but it doesn't sound right.

I guess the journals could turn around and pay the PI? But, then what? The "reviewers" still aren't being paid; just the PI? The incentive then is for the PI to have as many grad students as possible just reviewing papers. (FREE. MONEY.) If there was ever a dynamic I've been in where one agent doesn't need MORE power, it's the PI-grad-student one.

And, I've not even considered (in depth) the Bad Actors™ in such a situation. I'm just thinking about basic humans humaning along...

[lmc]

Interesting, thanks for the reply. I wasn't aware grad students were so heavily involved in the review process, thought it was more postdocs.