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