The first paragraph of Robert Sternberg's article ...
"Many of us have put in our best-faith efforts in writing journal articles
or grant proposals, only to receive savage reviews. I recently received a
savage review of an article I co-wrote and submitted to a journal that
referred to the submitted article as sounding like it was written by a
"charlatan attorney" and that referred to parts of the article as "absurd"
and as "gibberish." It compared the argumentation to that in "freshman-level
term papers," and recommended that the author, who is "seriously out of
his/her element with this topic...refrain from venturing into areas that
exceed his/her professional competence."
Ah yes - I've received a few of these gems from so-called "expert peer
referees" ... no doubt we all have!
3. APS OBSERVER
January 2002, Vol. 15, No. 1
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/
- PRESIDENTIAL COLUMN - ON CIVILITY IN REVIEWING
Presidential Guest Columnist Robert J. Sternberg calls for
psychologists to end the practice of "savage" reviews in evaluating
the work of peers.
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/0102/prescol.html
Well worth a read - and there is a very serious point to this article.
Regards .. Paul
_____________________________________________________________________
Paul Barrett DDI: NZ-(0)9-262-6082
email: [log in to unmask] Main: NZ-(0)9-261-0221
[log in to unmask] Fax: NZ-(0)9-262-6290
[log in to unmask] Mobile: NZ-021-415625
UK Efax/Voice: 0845-334-3038
Web: http://www.liv.ac.uk/~pbarrett/paulhome.htm
http://www.mariner7.com/
