<div dir="ltr">The fact that the peer-review process has remained so rigid and dogmatic would be reasonable if it were a generally flawless system. However, anyone who has engaged in this process is fully aware that it has many drawbacks, inefficiencies, and problems.  Many journal and academic articles have drawn attention to these problems and they do not need to be restated in depth here.  Suffice it to say, a mix of poorly aligned incentives, individual biases, and an incomplete process of peer-review has led to a file-drawer problem, p-hacking, replication difficulties, privatized publishing of public data, and a general inefficient system of scientific discovery.<div><br><a href="https://thewinnower.com/papers/4833-dogmatism-and-the-scientific-process-a-need-for-change">https://thewinnower.com/papers/4833-dogmatism-and-the-scientific-process-a-need-for-change</a></div></div>