Editorial Indulgence [Neurosurgery Wiki]

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
====== Editorial Indulgence ======

**Definition:**  
*Editorial indulgence* refers to the tendency of journal editors to **prioritize personal, institutional, or sentimental content** over scientific rigor, often by **publishing articles that would not meet standard peer-review criteria** if submitted by unaffiliated authors.

===== Characteristics =====
  * Acceptance of weak or anecdotal submissions from editorial board members or senior figures.
  * Over-publication of commemorative articles, historical retrospectives, or vanity series.
  * Minimal critical oversight applied to certain contributors ("editorial immunity").
  * Use of journal space for internal legacy building rather than academic advancement.

===== Red Flags =====
^ Symptom                                     ^ Consequence                                      ^
| Repeated publications by the same institution | Perceived bias and erosion of editorial credibility |
| Long, uncritical tributes or autobiographies  | Displacement of peer-reviewed scientific research  |
| Lack of methodological or bibliographic rigor | Weakens the journal's academic reputation         |

===== Consequences =====
  * Undermines the integrity and fairness of the peer-review process.
  * Prioritizes prestige, ego, or nostalgia over objective scientific merit.
  * Contributes to journal padding and reader disengagement.
  * May lead to reputational damage for the journal in academic circles.

===== Related Terms =====
  * Journal padding
  * Institutional bias
  * Vanity publishing
  * Editorial favoritism

===== Application Example =====
  * The multi-part series on the "genesis of Academic Neurosurgery" in ''Neurocirugía (Engl Ed)'' can be seen as a case of editorial indulgence, reflecting internal reverence rather than critical historical scholarship.