The paper proposes a two-tiered publishing architecture to reduce epistemic waste in scholarly communication, suggesting viable improvements.
To address these failures, the paper proposes a two-tiered publishing architecture that separates epistemic inclusion from symbolic curation, alongside a complementary tiered review model that aligns review intensity with epistemic risk. An optional framework for reviewer recognition is also outlined to support sustained evaluative engagement without undermining anonymity. These proposals are offered as conceptual system designs rather than prescriptive reforms, intended to clarify how current publishing architectures generate epistemic waste and to suggest structurally feasible pathways toward a more coherent, inclusive, and resilient scholarly communication system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trym Hansen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: