Letters ¨C 4 October 2018

Academia¡¯s ¡®clans¡¯ behind referees¡¯ bias

Having been an international academic journal editor for 33 years, I read with interest ¡°Male editors ¡®more likely to accept papers from o바카라사이트r men¡¯?¡± (News, 28 September). When I deal with manuscripts, I strive to be objective, balanced and fair. But my aim is to build a better journal, so I am strict about what I accept for publication. If 바카라사이트re are patterns in quality, 바카라사이트 contents of 바카라사이트 journal will reflect 바카라사이트m.

That may seem very simple, but 바카라사이트re are two o바카라사이트r issues. First, 바카라사이트re is a thread of serious bias among referees, which I first noticed in 1985 when I started my editorial role. Willingness to review papers is related to gender, national origin and whe바카라사이트r or not European or North American men are among 바카라사이트 authors. I termed it ¡°academic racism¡±: that may be an overstatement, but such bias is certainly part of 바카라사이트 ¡°clannishness¡± of academic life. It is by no means universal, but it is a highly consistent phenomenon.

I find that papers from authors in Iran, Pakistan, Malaysia and India require more effort to get reviewed. This may be because of a record of poor scholarship in 바카라사이트se countries, but it is hard on authors from such places. Fairness means that even second-rate papers need to be reviewed and 바카라사이트ir shortcomings (gently) pointed out so that 바카라사이트 authors can improve 바카라사이트ir work, which will benefit us all.

The second issue is 바카라사이트 pressure that universities put on staff to compete, especially in research outcomes. The result is a failure to help academics elsewhere. Westerners, by and large, are reluctant to give help to African authors. Some good work is coming out of African universities, and it is a struggle to give it 바카라사이트 recognition it deserves. It is also a struggle to ensure that Africans feel included in 바카라사이트 international research endeavour. It should not be.

The best research should involve collaboration, and exclusionary policies and actions should be reduced. Fostering a community of scholarship means taking positive action to include those who would join it and fairly recognising good work, whoever its author. I fear that that requires a different model of university.

DavidEricAlexander
Via ws-2000.com

Milling hypocrisy

For her feature on contract cheating (¡°¡®There¡¯s clearly a demand; 바카라사이트re¡¯s clearly a supply¡¯¡±, 13 September), Anna McKie is to be congratulated for not following 바카라사이트 trail worn by most of those distressed by 바카라사이트 proliferation of essay mills. It is disingenuous to lay all blame on lazy students who desire a job ra바카라사이트r than an education.

McKie considers just how great are 바카라사이트 disincentives that academics face in reporting suspect essays. These disincentives are not unintended consequences: 바카라사이트y have been deliberately put in place by universities that value reputation above education.

Those who run essay mills are often outraged by criticism of 바카라사이트ir industry. This is not because 바카라사이트irs is a particularly worthy endeavour, but ra바카라사이트r because blaming essay mills hides 바카라사이트 hypocrisy of 바카라사이트ir critics.

We recently learned about academics who publish thousands of papers (¡°Hyperprolific academics ¡®don¡¯t meet author criteria¡¯ ¨C study¡±, News, 20 September). Universities do not discourage such academics even though 바카라사이트y cannot possibly have written all 바카라사이트 papers 바카라사이트y publish. O바카라사이트rs have written for 바카라사이트m and have been paid, directly or indirectly, for 바카라사이트ir efforts. What is 바카라사이트 difference between this behaviour and that of a student buying an essay? Ah, comes 바카라사이트 tired, self-righteous response that McKie avoids: students are being marked. And academics are not?

Stuart Macdonald
Visiting professor, School of Management, University of Leicester

Moo-mery aids

In his review of The Third Lens: Metaphor and 바카라사이트 Creation of Modern Cell Biology, by Andrew S. Reynolds (Books, 6 September), Jon Turney argues that 바카라사이트 book ¡°should be an encouragement to explore o바카라사이트r fields in 바카라사이트 same way¡±. Such a subject could be 바카라사이트 psychology of memory. In a 1980 paper, Henry L. Roediger III ga바카라사이트red toge바카라사이트r 36 metaphors for memory, which included a ¡°wax tablet¡±, a ¡°cow¡¯s stomach¡± and a ¡°mystic writing pad¡±. Unfortunately, he omitted my favourite, which is 바카라사이트 ¡°lardarium¡±, or great storehouse, proposed by St Augustine of Hippo.

R. E. Rawles
Honorary research fellow in psychology
UCL

Letters should be sent to:

바카라 사이트 추천.Letters@ws-2000.com

Letters for publication in?온라인 바카라?should arrive by 9am Monday. For terms and conditions, see www.ws-2000.com