But edited collections need to innovate, if they are not to become endangered
What is it that drives teenagers into anti-social behaviour? Why do they smoke, or underperform at school? Peer pressure, of course. What is it that keeps the quality of published academic work high, fostering rigour and professional standards? Peer review, of course.
I loathe almost everything about the peer-review system. I resent having to spend hours reformatting papers into "house style" simply in order to submit them for consideration. And that's nothing compared with the tedium of putting in references to the pioneering work of anyone who might possibly be sent the paper to review. And it still makes me miserable to receive a rejection letter, even after all the practice I have had.
Any half-decent journal has to reject the great majority of papers it receives. Even a 2% acceptance rate is not unknown, which means that referees desperately look for grounds for rejecting almost everything. Sometimes they nail it, and you blush with shame when you read the report. More often, and