Gatekeeping refers to the control over who is allowed to access, contribute to, and be recognized within academic structures — including publication, funding, conferences, and institutional prestige.

• Peer review bias – Preference for established names, conventional ideas, or prestigious affiliations.
• Editorial filtering – Journal editors acting as arbiters of what counts as “important” or “publishable.”
• Funding gatekeepers – Grants often awarded to researchers with existing networks or popular topics.
• Conference exclusivity – Invitations and visibility often reserved for insiders.
• Credential barriers – Access to publication or positions often tied to specific degrees or institutional pedigree.

Gatekeeping can:

• ✅ Preserve standards — when transparent and fair.
• ❌ Suppress innovation — when driven by hierarchy or groupthink.
• ❌ Create echo chambers — where only mainstream or “safe” voices are heard.
• ❌ Marginalize dissent — making it hard for new or critical voices to emerge.

Example: A committee of prestigious surgeons publishes a broad, superficial review in a high-impact journal, not for its content but because of who they are. This fills the academic space and discourages more technically rigorous but less prestigious voices.

• Academic Prestige
• Careerism
• Academic Theater
• Factory-Made Science

Bottom line: Gatekeeping decides *who gets to speak*, *who gets heard*, and *who remains invisible* in the academic world.