6533b855fe1ef96bd12b0726

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Doing Science: Peer reviewing

subject

description

External peer review is a hallmark of science. “Published in a peer-reviewed journal” is a sign of quality, meaning that the work has been scrutinised by knowledgeable and independent peers. Moreover, peer review also serves the purpose of improving the work after the authors have done their best and, thus, being a reviewer carries a responsibility. However, it comes with little reward; reviewing is usually done without financial compensation and often outside of work hours. But reviewing is rewarding in itself! Besides being pro bono , it exposes you, as a reviewer, to novel findings and adds a new perspective to your own research and scientific writing. And you can add “Peer reviewer for Journal of X” to your CV. This Doing Science article will deal with peer reviewing of journal articles and conference abstracts. For those of you familiar with the series, the format will be slightly different. Different people tend to have rather personal approaches to reviewing, and rather than generic tips, this article is built around an interview with a very experienced reviewer, and our own personal reflections as reviewers and editors. Figure 1 The typical review process for a scientific peer-reviewed journal. After the author, maybe with trembling hands, hits the “Submit article” button, an e-mail titled “Please be associate editor for a new manuscript” appears in my mailbox. After scanning the title and abstract of the manuscript, I click “agree” if the manuscript is not clearly outside my area of expertise. You would be surprised how wide the range of topics of received manuscripts is! As an author, it is mandatory to carefully select the journal to submit to and to choose a clear, descriptive title and adequate key words, to increase your chances of reaching the right Editor immediately, and also aid the Editor in finding …