Although you must be sincere even when the news is bad, avoid saying anything in unhelpful or offensive ways, and remember that even a brief mention of a paper’s strengths will encourage the author to accept the more critical comments in constructive ways. At we pride ourselves on our large and extremely dedicated team of academic and scientific professionals.Our proofreaders and editors are highly educated native speakers of English and their areas of specialisation range so widely that we are able to help our clients improve and perfect all kinds of research manuscripts for successful publication.Whether you are preparing a conference paper for presentation or publication, polishing a professional report to share with your colleagues, or tackling the daunting task of editing and perfecting any kind of academic or scientific document, a qualified member of our expert team can provide invaluable assistance and give you greater confidence in your written work.
At some point in almost every scientist’s early career, he or she is asked to peer review a research paper for a journal.
Peer reviews are crucial to maintaining a high standard in research and should not be taken lightly.
• Do not be harsh, mean spirited or dismissive in your comments, even when you think the research and paper poor.
The author can still benefit from your comments, and you should never say that you will not bother reviewing an article because it is so poor.
The editor has sought your opinion and wants to know exactly what you think, so be clear and as decisive as possible.
• Never forget that you are also an author whose writing undergoes peer review.Reviews require considerable attention and reflection, and editors and authors require substance and specifics.Dashing off a short paragraph that simply says the paper is inadequate and should not be published is unhelpful and far from good enough.Do not forget that you are the reviewer and critic, not the author or co-author of the paper.• When you mention that scholarship is missing from the references, think about what is relevant to the research, not your own citation counts.This can be a stressful question for early career scientists who aren’t very confident in their own abilities yet. Herendeen says, “if it is a reputable journal, the editor has probably spent some time investigating potential reviewers and thinks you have relevant background.” So to some extent, you can consider the invitation itself a vote of confidence.“If you are not certain whether you have the background, you can always ask the editor for clarification.What You Should Not Do While Writing a Peer Review Although there is plenty of advice available on peer reviewing for scientific journals, that advice tends to blend the discussion of what a reviewer should not do with that of what he or she should do to be successful.However, since committing a major faux pas in reviewing practice can wipe out all the positive effects of the effort you have put into reviewing and also prevent you from receiving future invitations from journal editors it seems a good idea to provide a clear list of activities and behaviours that should be strictly avoided.• Although you should give serious thought to whether you can do a review or not, do not unnecessarily delay your response to an editor’s invitation to peer review an article.Time is pressing and the publication process takes long enough even when everyone is as efficient as possible.