being an ad-hoc reviewer for a journal (how to put in application)

[lams11]

After having a first-author paper accepted, the journal editor extended the offer for me to be a reviewer for the journal.

Is being an ad-hoc reviewer just out of undergrad something worth mentioning in my app, and if so, how should I go about listing it in my app?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[I'm No Superman]

After having a first-author paper accepted, the journal editor extended the offer for me to be a reviewer for the journal.

Is being an ad-hoc reviewer just out of undergrad something worth mentioning in my app, and if so, how should I go about listing it in my app?

Yeah, I'd either list it under ECs, or include it in your description for "research"

 

[Catalystik]

After having a first-author paper accepted, the journal editor extended the offer for me to be a reviewer for the journal.

Is being an ad-hoc reviewer just out of undergrad something worth mentioning in my app, and if so, how should I go about listing it in my app?

For how many manuscripts have you been asked to be a reviewer, so far?

 

[lams11]

For how many manuscripts have you been asked to be a reviewer, so far?

Only 1, but my PI also said that any time the journal asks her to review a paper she's going to decline and recommend me to them, so I expect a decent bit more in the future (and I'm not applying for another year).

So should I just mention it in my research section, but if I end up reviewing a lot of papers start to consider making a separate activity out of it? Or only mention it if I review a significant number of manuscripts?

I've already done several "mentored" reviews in the past, but in these cases my PI was the actual reviewer (I wrote the review, and she then maybe added a couple of sentences before sending).

 

[Catalystik]

Only 1, but my PI also said that any time the journal asks her to review a paper she's going to decline and recommend me to them, so I expect a decent bit more in the future (and I'm not applying for another year).

So should I just mention it in my research section, but if I end up reviewing a lot of papers start to consider making a separate activity out of it? Or only mention it if I review a significant number of manuscripts?

I've already done several "mentored" reviews in the past, but in these cases my PI was the actual reviewer (I wrote the review, and she then maybe added a couple of sentences before sending).

I suggest you include the activity only if you're asked to review a decent number of manuscripts; if they keep coming back to you, the value of your opinion is supported. Since you have a year before you apply, this has a chance of being sufficiently substantial to make for a solid listing.

Be sure your PI is aware of them so you have a contact to legitimize the activity. The journal editor is another possibility, though.

 

[lams11]

I suggest you include the activity only if you're asked to review a decent number of manuscripts; if they keep coming back to you, the value of your opinion is supported. Since you have a year before you apply, this has a chance of being sufficiently substantial to make for a solid listing.

Be sure your PI is aware of them so you have a contact to legitimize the activity. The journal editor is another possibility, though.

So should I list it under my research description even if it's only 1 or 2 papers? But make it its own separate activity if I get asked to review a lot?

 

[Catalystik]

So should I list it under my research description even if it's only 1 or 2 papers? But make it its own separate activity if I get asked to review a lot?

If you are only asked 1-2 times, it could be interpreted that you didn't do a very good job, so I would probably refrain completely, unless you build up some numbers.

 

[lams11]

If you are only asked 1-2 times, it could be interpreted that you didn't do a very good job, so I would probably refrain completely, unless you build up some numbers.

Makes sense. Thanks for the help!