How can referees receive credit or recognition for their work, and what form should this take;
Several potential solutions exist to make sure that the review process does not cause a bottleneck in the current system: - Increase the total pool of potential referees, - Editorial staff more thoroughly vet submissions prior to sending for review, - Increase acceptance rates to avoid review duplication, - Impose a production cap on authors, - Decrease the number of referees per paper, and/or - Decrease the time spent on peer review.
Other research shows a similar picture, with approximately 70% of respondents to a small survey done by Nicholson & Alperin (2016) indicating that they would list peer review as a professional service on their curriculum vitae. 27% of respondents mentioned formal recognition in assessment as a factor that would motivate them to participate in public peer review. These numbers indicate that the lack of credit referees receive for peer review is likely a strong contributing factor to the perceived stagnation of traditional models - f1000research.com 
# See also