TTR reviewers and peer review part II.

Michael Gochfeld gochfeld at eohsi.rutgers.edu
Wed Oct 4 07:03:14 EDT 2000


Ron was apparently reluctant to publish or release the names of 
reviewers of the papers that have appeared in his journal.

Several ornithological journals (and some toxicology journals) annually 
publish the names of their peer reviewers, by way of saying thank you. 
In one case they even published how many papers each reviewer had 
reviewed.

I can't see any reason not to publish such a list, nor is it likely that 
readers would refer to the list to see whether they "believe" a 
particular publication. 

Occasionally the published paper will even include acknowledgements of 
the reviewers, thanking them for constructive criticisms.

On the other hand the almost universal policy of anonymous reviews is 
disturbing.  If I get back a MS with criticisms that I consider really 
far-fetched, I am much more likely to pay attention to them if they come 
from a known entity who I(or at least others) respect.  Often, however, 
I suspect that the assigned reviewer was simply too busy and gave the MS 
to a graduate student who wanted to prove how smart they were and that 
they too could tear something to shreds. 

Most editors nowadays allow (and a few even encourage) reviewers to sign 
their reviews, and I personally don't review for the few journals who 
insist that reviews must be anonymous. 

I think the playing field is shifting (gradually) to fewer anonymous 
reviews, which in the long run is likely to make the peer review process 
more constructive and less destructive.   

Mike Gochfeld


More information about the Leps-l mailing list