I was asked to write a post on how to select or suggest editors or reviewers.
It’s a topic that I’m reluctant to write about - bc it can offend journal editors, reviewers, and authors.
It’s a no win topic.
Why?
Bc the norms and rules vary widely & my editorial experience working with ‘suggested’ reviewers has generally not been good.
Also, bc suggesting reviewers comes with some peril and temptation of either being accused of or actually behaving in an unethical way.
If I had my druthers, the practice would be done away with.
So with that expression of trepidation & caveat & longing, here we go!
First, don’t pick someone famous.
Famous people usually say no. They are busy. They get an amazing number of requests. They have moved on from the topic - and no long know the literature.
There are a myriad of reasons.
Second, don’t pick a journal editor.
See above. Plus it puts the editor in a tough spot. They will want to write the review but they really don’t have time.
Third, don’t pick a senior or associate editor in their first year at a journal.
The editor is still figuring thing. They tend to be tougher.
You want soneone who has cut their teeth & more relaxed e.g., can see the big picture contribution of your work.
Fourth, don’t pick your friend, esp., your friend who knows the paper.
It is cheating. People that do this earn bad reputations & groups of people that do this eventually earn bad reputations.
If your friend doesn’t cheat, it puts them in a compromising position.
Friends don’t compromise friends.
Fifth, do pick someone you cite.
That person often knows the literature. You can point to the paper as a reason.
Sixth, do pick someone who has recently used your method or studied your topic.
I strongly suggest you do both.
Many good papers are rejected bc the review panel doesn’t know the method or domain.
Look in conference proceedings for people currently active on a topic.
Seventh, do read the journal that you are submitting to’s guidelines.
Some journals don’t take suggestions. Others do. Most have conflict of interest guidelines.
Strictly adhere to the guidelines. You don’t need to be accused of an ethical breach.
Finally, do disclose conflicts of interest.
I have seen papers Unaccepted when conflicts are found late in the publication process - either by default or by the addition of a different reviewer.
It makes authors look bad & wastes eberyone’s time.
I hope this helps - my best suggestion - is keep it clean, don’t compromise yourself, and don’t compromise your friends.
Best of luck.
Comments