The paper "Avoiding a Tragedy of the Commons in the Peer Review Process" is available here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.06246

Here's how science works: You have a question about some infinitesimal sliver of the universe. You form a hypothesis, test it, and eventually gather enough data to support or disprove what you thought was going on. The next bit is less glamorous: You write a manuscript, submit it to an academic journal, and endure the gauntlet of peer review, where a small group of anonymous experts in your field scrutinize the quality of your work. Peer review has its flaws. Human beings (even scientists) are biased, lazy, and self-interested.