Pros and Cons of the Peer Review Process in the Field of Academic Publishing (Presentation Slides)

The Pros and Cons of the Peer Review Process in the Field of Academic Publishing Philip J. Boutin, Jr., MPS in Publishing, George Washington University

This presentation offers a critical and constructive analysis of the peer review process as it functions within the field of academic publishing. The session will explore the traditional strengths of peer review -- ensuring scholarly rigor, providing expert feedback, and establishing credibility -- while also addressing major critiques, including systemic bias, reviewer inconsistency, and inefficiencies in knowledge dissemination. Particular attention is given to the evolving landscape of academic publishing and how emerging models -- such as open, post-publication, and collaborative review -- offer promising paths forward. By contextualizing the peer review process within the domain of publishing, the presentation invites discussion and deliberation on how the field can lead academia in peer review reform.

Philip J. Boutin, Jr. is a MPS in Publishing student at George Washington University. He has over 13 years of higher education teaching experience, including as Assistant Professor of Marketing at Eastern Kentucky University. Phil holds a Ph.D. in Business Administration with a concentration in Marketing from the University of Tennessee, an M.S. in International Business and an M.B.A. in Marketing from Southern New Hampshire University, and a B.A. in Communication with a minor in English from the University of New Hampshire. He also has over 12 years of experience in marketing, communications, and sales for small and medium-sized organizations in the for-profit and non-profit sectors and in multiple industries, including publishing. Phil has authored or co-authored over 35 academic works and his current research focus is on publishing ethics, peer review reform, and author identity.