Table 4.
| Disadvantages of the peer review system |
|---|
| The output depends on the efforts taken by the reviewer and the quality of reviews may vary accordingly. |
| Potential for reviewer bias exists. Personal biases may lead to the reviewer having a closed mindset and suppress new ideas. |
| May still miss major flaws in the manuscript. |
| It is expensive for the journal. |
| Publication may be delayed due to the time consumed in conducting the peer review. |
| May not detect a conflict of interest by the authors. |
| Editors may assume a “high-handed” or a “hands-off” attitude. |
| It may be difficult for the editor to find reviewers as the existing ones are already overloaded and there is a dearth of good reviewers. |
| Scientific frauds may (still) go undetected despite the peer review process. |