Tags: Short Term Long Term Goals EssayStrategic Plan Sample For BusinessDissertation On Liberty And NecessityEssay About The Role Of The Youth In Nation BuildingGraphic Organizer For Writing An EssayFrida Kahlo EssayPeer Review My EssayCritical Risk Factors Business PlanOpinion Essay About Reading BooksProcess Of Photosynthesis Essay
I always read the paper sequentially, from start to finish, making comments on the PDF as I go along.I look for specific indicators of research quality, asking myself questions such as: Are the background literature and study rationale clearly articulated? (I usually pay close attention to the use—and misuse—of frequentist statistics.) Is the presentation of results clear and accessible? That usually becomes apparent by the Methods section.As junior scientists develop their expertise and make names for themselves, they are increasingly likely to receive invitations to review research manuscripts.
I usually consider first the relevance to my own expertise.
I will turn down requests if the paper is too far removed from my own research areas, since I may not be able to provide an informed review.
Then I look at how convincing the results are and how careful the description is. The parts of the Discussion I focus on most are context and whether the authors make claims that overreach the data. I want statements of fact, not opinion or speculation, backed up by data.
Most journals don't have special instructions, so I just read the paper, usually starting with the Abstract, looking at the figures, and then reading the paper in a linear fashion.
(In my field, authors are under pressure to broadly sell their work, and it's my job as a reviewer to address the validity of such claims.) Third, I make sure that the design of the methods and analyses are appropriate. I also pay attention to the schemes and figures; if they are well designed and organized, then in most cases the entire paper has also been carefully thought out.
First, I read a printed version to get an overall impression. When diving in deeper, first I try to assess whether all the important papers are cited in the references, as that also often correlates with the quality of the manuscript itself.
I read the digital version with an open word processing file, keeping a list of “major items” and “minor items” and making notes as I go.
There are a few aspects that I make sure to address, though I cover a lot more ground as well.
Having said that, I tend to define my expertise fairly broadly for reviewing purposes. I am more willing to review for journals that I read or publish in.
Before I became an editor, I used to be fairly eclectic in the journals I reviewed for, but now I tend to be more discerning, since my editing duties take up much of my reviewing time.