Dear List Members
In the last year or so I have noticed that more and more papers go to
a second or even third round of reviewing before editors make a
decision. I find this for my own papers, papers that I review, papers
for which I act as Associate Editor, and from looking at the review
history of published papers. It doesn't seem to make a difference if
the first reviews recommend minor revision, the editors still seem to
want a second round of reviewing before taking a decision. I suppose
that this arises from a number of factors, including the publishers
pressure to increase impact factors and a further veting process
because of an increase in the number of papers received by the
journals. Nevertheless, what it does do is double or even triple the
work of the reviewer and the AE's: at times to the point of becoming
tiresome. If you expect that accepting a paper to review could be a
threefold process that lasts six or eight months, then one thinks
twice before accepting to review it.
I realise that this as nothing to do with geotectonics as such, but I
would like to hear other people's opinions and experiences on this
are.
Sincerely
Dennis
--
-----------
Dr. Dennis Brown
Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra "Jaume Almera"
c/Lluis Sole i Sabaris s/n
08028 Barcelona
Spain
Tel: 34 93 409 54 10
Fax: 34 93 411 00 12
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
http://wija.ija.csic.es/gt/dennisbrown/
|