One generally does not get any credit/reward for peer reviewing in academia, but it is instead a service we are all called to perform for the greater good of our discipline. When you peer review an article for a journal, you will subsequently be sent the other reviews along with the editor's ultimate decision about the manuscript. Major journals, at least in sociology, solicit three sets of comments from reviewers. Today, I received back the other reviews for something that I reviewed for a major sociology journal. The length of the three reviews:
Reviewer A [me]: 86 lines
Reviewer B: 14 lines (in which the review did not actually address anything specific about the manuscript other than its "tone")
Reviewer C: 0 lines (despite repeated exhortations, the editor regretfully notes, no third review could be obtained)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Oh, yeah, Reviewer B. I've gotten that little bastard before. Nothing helps more than vague, pointless advice.
Care to reveal the journal's initials and/or some revealing factor?
There's no reason to name the journal.
The first paper I ever sent to one of the major sociology journals received a review that was ~8 lines long and handwritten.
Post a Comment