On why you were dismissed as a reviewer (or remember your role).
While visiting with a journal editor over lunch, I had a great conversation about when to dismiss a reviewer.
Dismissing a reviewer is a tricky thing - because it means either a) not using their review or b) not inviting them back to look at another revision of a paper - in either case, the reviewer is ticked off & can pack a grudge.
Often, an editor really thinks through dismissing a Reviewer Two because as a steward for a journal, you have to appear beyond reproach & sometimes dismissed reviewers like to broadcast why they think they were dismissed - e.g., insider trading or paper swapping.
(Note: for new readers & non-academics, Reviewer 2 is an academic reference to an overly demanding, often wrong, reviewer who is hellbent on ensuring a paper is not published)
Rather than perpetuate the myth of dismissal due to insider trading or some form of misconduct, I thought it might be good to offer reasons for dismissing a reviewer.
Reason 1: you are factually incorrect.
Often, I see reviewers cite a standard used to evaluate one method applied to another.
No, you do not ask for the same fit statistics or tests for structural equation modeling & econometrics.
Reason 2: You are constantly escalating.
Often, I see a reviewer seek to kill a paper. They do so by layering in new requests in each round of review.
No, it is not ok to bring new issues into a review process in the fourth round of review.
Reason 3: You act as if you get to make the decision.
Reviewers recommend. Editors decide.
No, it is not ok to put in a review that the editor is wrong & the paper should be rejected.
Reason 4: You need to respond to the editor's direction.
If the editor tells authors not to address a point, then stop harping on the point.
If the editor extends another revision, read the revised paper with the editor's direction mind & assess the changes vis a vis that report.
This does not mean don't be true to yourself - it does mean don't be surprised if you are dismissed from a panel.
Reason 5: You use inappropriate language in the review or private comments.
I had a reviewer note that maybe it was the medication they were on that caused the mean review.
Fastest dismissal ever.
You should not swear, call an author or editor stupid, or appear dictatorial in a review package.
So how to avoid being dismissed?
First, watch your tone.
Be collegial & constructive - even if you think the paper should be rejected.
Second, be constructive.
If the editor wants to offer a revision, please calibrate your suggestions accordingly, even if you don't like the paper.
Remember, the goal is to accept papers.
Third, respect the editor.
If you disagree, put it into the private comments & offer a rich explanation for why.
If you want to reject a paper, use your manners, it'll improve the editor's opinion of you & make it more likely that they will heed your advice.
Best of luck!
Comentários