Publication Type

Working Paper

Publication Date

5-2014

Abstract

In this article I review some of the common errors I have made as a reviewer and suggest ways to avoid them.The progress of science depends on reviewers as much as it depends upon researchers developing new science. Reviewers provide impartial, anonymous, and expert advice to researchers, and they screen which research gets published in scientific journals. When the review process works well, it acts as an effective filter and enables dissemination of high-quality and rigorous scientific work. As so much of scientific progress depends upon review, it is surprising that reviewers learn this science by doing. Of course, there are articles that suggest general norms of behavior for reviewers.

Keywords

reviewer, errors

Discipline

Community-Based Learning | Educational Methods

Research Areas

Strategy and Organisation

First Page

1

Last Page

10

Identifier

10.2139/ssrn.2447161

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Additional URL

http://doi.org./10.2139/ssrn.2447161

Share

COinS