Peer review is widely viewed as an essential step for ensuring scientific quality of a work and is a cornerstone of scholarly publishing. On the other hand, the actors involved in the publishing process are often driven by incentives which may, and increasingly do, undermine the quality of published work, especially in the presence of unethical conduits.God help us all.
We presented to  subjects a mix of genuine and machine generated reviews and we measured the ability of our proposal to actually deceive subjects judgment. The results highlight the ability of our method to produce reviews that often look credible and may subvert the decision.
Thursday, September 22, 2016
Tastes Like the Real Thing
And in the category of "peer review is so screwed", some researchers machine-generated reviews and presented them along with actual reviews to participants, who generally could not notice a difference: