Back to Chapter Back to Chapter

Case 11c :

"A Sure Thing"

Kaiser ranted sarcastically,

"I am so tired of these reviewers. Fix this, fix that, I do not like your writing style. Why did you not run x,y,z analyses? Why did you not send me a unicorn with this paper? And, just because I do not 'game the system' and get my friends to review all of my papers, I get rejected. I am going to start sending in my wife's name as a reviewer for my papers and direct them to my second email account—the one I use for teaching only. That way, someone competent will read these papers!"

Leif, half joking, asked,

"Why not, Kaiser? You are right. Everyone 'games the system'. If you do not cheat, you do not get published".

Kaiser left Leif's office and finished converting the endnotes to the required citation format for yet the third journal to which he would send this paper.

One he was done, he completed the usual on-line submission system, but this time, he listed as reviewers Leif, his wife, and his father, directing each name to a different email address he owned. A few days later, Kaiser received two review requests for his paper sent to these reviewers.

• What has Kaiser done here that could be considered wrong?
• Is the problem here with the journal, the peer-review system, or with Kaiser in particular?
• Is Kaiser merely "playing the game", or has he done something unethical?