“The editors concluded that Chen-Yuan Chen, a researcher in Taiwan, had created a “peer-review and citation ring.””
Based on my own personal experience in NSF-funded, “peer reviewed” research publication, ALL “peer review” is based on “peer-review and citation rings”. Furthermore, I thought the reviews were often shoddy, in that the reviewers often didn’t have the necessary knowledge to do proper review. My impression was that “peer review” was often pro forma and considered a necessary evil, rather than an integral part of assuring research accuracy and integrity.
>> Based on my own personal experience in NSF-funded, “peer reviewed” research publication, ALL “peer review” is based on “peer-review and citation rings”. Furthermore, I thought the reviews were often shoddy, in that the reviewers often didn’t have the necessary knowledge to do proper review.
Quotes on book jackets from "authors who've read and liked the book" are often swapped. The blurbs may hold no credibility at all.