After the lecture on peer-review, I learned that a successful academic career depends heavily on the amount of research publication in the leading and reputable academic journals. Taking the peer-review process into consideration, whether people get promoted or not really comes down to what their colleagues think about their work and approaches. Perhaps the relationship between the author and the reviewer could play a role in the process. Particularly, in the nonblind review. This makes me wonder if corruption or bribery may occur when the identity of the reviewers could be identified over time.
What do you guys think?