Peer reviewing articles

[cmuhooligan]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hi all,

So yesterday I received a surprising invitation to review an article for a rather prestigious journal. Although I am very excited to have received the offer, I am also a bit intimidated, given that I haven't peer reviewed for a journal before, and the topic of the article in question is related, yet somewhat distal from my areas of study. I'm just wondering if any of y'all have gone through this yet, and may be willing to share some tips? 🙂

 

[MNIkid87]

Congrats 🙂
First of all, do NOT be intimidated by the fact that you are not an expert on the exact topic... it's really not that uncommon (the situations is a bit better for peer review for journals, but when you apply for grants it's going to be even more extreme... there you have (often) people who don't know jack about your research deciding whether it's fundable). I'm sure you'll be fine!

I actually still have some powerpoint slides on how to peer review, so if you want pm me and I can send them to you. They are not perfect but they are a starting point 🙂

 

[thewesternsky]

Awesome! That's so exciting. 🙂

Have you received reviews from a submitted paper yet? I assume so, since they usually don't ask unpublished people to act as reviewers. If so, you've probably seen the standard format (which can vary a lot, but at least you have an idea of what's expected. If you haven't seen a review before, ask your supervisor for one or two that he/she has done, so you can see the format and such.

I usually open with a summary of the article, then continue with the comments-- I try to sandwich negative comments in the middle, between positive comments, but that's just because I'm nice. 🙂 Then at the end I summarize my ideas/recommendations-- i.e., good article, these are strengths, however some weaknesses (a, b, c) should be addressed.... etc.

G'luck, and congrats!

 

[cmuhooligan]

Yes, I have received many reviews in the past. I guess I just want to make sure that I do a good job (and impress the editor, especially considering that I have articles under review at the same journal currently!) I want to try to balance providing helpful feedback, without coming off "too strong." I think having my mentor look over my review before submitting would be helpful.

Awesome! That's so exciting. 🙂

Have you received reviews from a submitted paper yet? I assume so, since they usually don't ask unpublished people to act as reviewers. If so, you've probably seen the standard format (which can vary a lot, but at least you have an idea of what's expected. If you haven't seen a review before, ask your supervisor for one or two that he/she has done, so you can see the format and such.

I usually open with a summary of the article, then continue with the comments-- I try to sandwich negative comments in the middle, between positive comments, but that's just because I'm nice. 🙂 Then at the end I summarize my ideas/recommendations-- i.e., good article, these are strengths, however some weaknesses (a, b, c) should be addressed.... etc.

G'luck, and congrats!