The Benefits Of Choosing The Peerless Review
You can be assured that your work will not be rejected based on bias towards the subject of your research or the conclusion that you draw.
You retain all rights to your research. You may continue to edit after publication, and you may remove your work from the Researchers One library at your discretion.
The traditional process of academic peer review, revision, and resubmission can be a long process, to say nothing of the delay between acceptance of your work and its actual appearance in a print journal. The Peerless Review is fast, with few obstacles to publication. Provided your work satisfies the objective criteria of Peerless, it may appear on Researchers One as little as a month after submission.
The Researchers One library is open-access and online, ensuring maximum visibility for your research.
Transparency. If your submission is not immediately accepted for publication by The Peerless Review, the journal provides specific, objective feedback that would ensure publication. Resubmission of revised manuscripts will result in publication, provided the requirements are satisfied.
The users of Researchers One come from a number of disciplinary orientations, ensuring that academics from a variety of fields will encounter your work.
Readers of your work can provide you with feedback and commentary through the Researchers One platform.
The Peerless Review and Researchers One will announce your publication via social media accounts.
Join and help expand the community of scholars at Researchers One, who are dedicated to reimagining how academic research is shared and circulated.
How Does It Work? How Can Quality Be Ensured Without the Peer Review Process?
The Peerless Review recognizes the importance of maintaining standards for the publication of scholarly research, but we believe that the peer review process (as it currently exists) is not adequately maintaining those standards. Further, the costs of running a traditional, peer-reviewed print journal ensure that only a fraction of the research that is produced in any given discipline never reaches a wider audience. The limited space within any given issue of a legacy journal places artificial restrictions on the length of essays, and the work deemed “worthy” for publication is too often work that affirms and reinforces the assumptions of the discipline, or work that simply flatters the fads and biases of academic culture.
The experimental aspect of The Peerless Review lies in the journal’s assumption that the baseline quality of academic work can be determined via an assessment of the formal criteria of the genre of the academic essay. In other words, an essay’s readiness for publication in The Peerless Review is not based on a necessarily subjective assessment of the novelty or quality of the argument or its “contribution to the field.”
Instead, the journal renders a publication decision by objectively evaluating the essay’s conformity to the generic features of scholarly writing – factors like the length of the submission, its usage of existing scholarly research, its implementation of a standard style of academic citation, grammatical and syntactical correctness in the writing, and more. By moving from the traditional subjective assessments of traditional peer review to an objective assessment of the formal characteristics of genre, The Peerless Review eliminates the possibility of political and disciplinary biases. We leave the business of assessing the “value” of your research, the strength of your argument, and the novelty of your contribution to the audience of your published essay.