Can reviewer #2 be bribed with tuna?
November 25, 2017 4:29 AM   Subscribe

 
Speaking as someone whose job used to involve LOTS of reviewer reports, I could only be surprised if more of them WEREN'T written by cats.

(Mr. Whiskers would never self-identity in the second paragraph.)
posted by The Underpants Monster at 5:45 AM on November 25 [1 favorite]


*meep*
posted by infini at 7:08 AM on November 25


I hate when the reviewer shits all over my work.
posted by biogeo at 7:53 AM on November 25 [5 favorites]


(mental note: add more string to next ms)
posted by doctornemo at 9:55 AM on November 25 [1 favorite]


My cat will approve any article as long as it's printed out on delicious paper and not just digital on some disgusting screen.
posted by easternblot at 12:28 PM on November 25 [1 favorite]


F. D. C. Willard does not sign reviews.
posted by saltbush and olive at 7:53 PM on November 25 [1 favorite]


Re: F.D.C Willard: clearly the department should have offered him a purrfessorship, not a professorship.
posted by eviemath at 9:23 AM on November 26 [2 favorites]


I'm about to review my first articles, so the fifth link is really helpful (How Not to Be Reviewer #2).

One thing I would add to the list is: don't abuse it as an opportunity to bully the author into citing your own work! It's something I know other people have had happen to them. I sense it's also happened to me, as one reviewer thought that it was important that I reference this minor and only slightly relevant academic artist in my paper, which I in the end refused to do. It's hard to imagine the mindset that would think this is ok, and not feel shame at least in front of editors who would see what you were doing, even if the author in the double-blind process couldn't.

Also, reviewers assuming my lack of awareness of things I chose not to include (or did include, but they missed), is one of the more infuriating habits the author mentions.
posted by pinothefrog at 9:42 AM on November 26 [1 favorite]


On the other hand, I just reviewed something that was basically "A Literature Review About Applying Method X to Area Y" that did not cite my paper, the first (and as far as I can tell, only) paper to apply method X to area Y. It wasn't anything shady: my paper had only become available around a month before they submitted the manuscript, so I'm sure they just didn't see it. But you can bet I told them to cite it!
posted by en forme de poire at 7:53 PM on November 26 [1 favorite]


And then I sharpened my claws on the couch
posted by en forme de poire at 7:56 PM on November 26 [5 favorites]


« Older Hold my beer, Elon   |   VR Gaming for Time-Travel Newer »


You are not currently logged in. Log in or create a new account to post comments.