Sense About Science, the British charitable trust that tries to educate the community on the correct handling of scientific claims, and to "work in partnership with scientific bodies, research publishers, policy makers, the public and the media, to change public discussions about science and evidence", has produced today a very interesting booklet on peer review.
The document, which can be downloaded in pdf format here, is an assessment of the merits of peer review in scientific publications, and of the challenges that are posed to its good functioning. It is very cleanly written and it is worked around dozens of insightful quotes by editors, reviewers, researchers who alternate at both ends of the mechanism.
I am featured with a couple of quotes, to which I stand by. However I believe the quote I liked the most is the one by Stephen Curry, a professor of structural biology at the Imperial College of London. Here is his advice, a precious one indeed:
I think the document is of very high quality and should be distributed as widely as possible among researchers. If anything, it gives meaning to a practice that many of us find annoying when we submit a paper for publication...
Front page image credit: Shutterstock.
The document, which can be downloaded in pdf format here, is an assessment of the merits of peer review in scientific publications, and of the challenges that are posed to its good functioning. It is very cleanly written and it is worked around dozens of insightful quotes by editors, reviewers, researchers who alternate at both ends of the mechanism.
I am featured with a couple of quotes, to which I stand by. However I believe the quote I liked the most is the one by Stephen Curry, a professor of structural biology at the Imperial College of London. Here is his advice, a precious one indeed:
"When reviewing, try to remember that you are an author too and be professional and constructive in your approach. That can be hard but don’t let your inner nitpicker get the upper hand. Leave 24 hours between reading the manuscript and writing your review, to allow time for your reasonable self to rise to the fore. "Very wise words ! I wish I had received this advice a long time ago - I am an impatient reviewer, and often times when I write a review for a paper I end up taking any of a large number of despicable attitudes, from sarcasm to fastidiousness, which are however due more to my bad humor of the moment than to my assessment of the work I am reviewing. Thanks Stephen for this important advice!
I think the document is of very high quality and should be distributed as widely as possible among researchers. If anything, it gives meaning to a practice that many of us find annoying when we submit a paper for publication...
Front page image credit: Shutterstock.
