Revolution in Science by Miguel Abambres

sustainable* ways of publishing and assessing academic/scientific work
* Non-biased, Non-fraudulent, Non-flawed, Non-unhealthy

+1 Recommend

Collection details

Feel free to suggest me new papers for the collection and to send me proposals for collaboration(s). Please check



  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Editorial: found
Is Open Access

Bye Bye Peer-Reviewed Publishing

 Miguel Abambres (corresponding) (2019)

Anyone supporting all ideas presented in this work can become co-author without adding any content. This is perfectly OK for me, since this is an opinion paper, and thus the more it is disseminated, the more likely those ideas are made real in a near future. If you want me to add you as co-author, please send me your name and affiliation to


This work is the continuation of a ‘revolution’ started with Research Counts, Not the Journal. Own and published opinions from worldwide scientists on critical issues of peer-reviewed publishing are presented. In my opinion, peer-reviewed publishing is a quite flawed process (in many ways) that has greatly harmed Science for a long time – it has been imposed by most academic and science funding institutions as the only way to assess scientific performance. Unfortunately, most academics still follow that path, even though I believe most do it for the fear of losing their job or not being promoted. This paper aims to encourage (i) a full disruption of peer-reviewed publishing and (ii) the use of free eprint repositories for a sustainable academic/scientific publishing, i.e. healthier (no stress/distress associated to the peer review stage and the long waiting for publication) and more economic, effective and efficient (research is made immediately available and trackable/citable to anyone). On the other hand, it should be pointed out that nothing exists against scientific publishers/journals – actually it´s perfectly normal that any company wants to implement its own quality criteria. This paper is just the way chosen to promote the quick implementation of suitable policies for research evaluation.


    Collection Information