Read on Twitter
I’ve been getting a lot of rejections & (obvi) thinking about shitty reviews. What’s a shitty review? Common elements: broad statements abt the paper w/out details of why. No respect for RQ or approach. Making the review abt the author, not the paper. Being an assflap.
Some examples of shitty reviews:
- I don’t like it. Write this other paper instead
- Let me ramble on how the author sucks
- The worst thing ever! No, I will NOT say why
- Meh. “redo the front”
- “Great but not crazy about the methods”
- UNPUBLISHABLE IN ANY FORM
- I don’t like it. Write this other paper instead
- Let me ramble on how the author sucks
- The worst thing ever! No, I will NOT say why
- Meh. “redo the front”
- “Great but not crazy about the methods”
- UNPUBLISHABLE IN ANY FORM
Here’s the thing about writing a shitty review – you are wasting the author & journal time. But you are also wasting YOUR time. BC you just read a whole (ahem, maybe) paper and wrote 500+ words and *none of it will help the paper get better.* That’s a total waste of your time!
Can we instead write non-shitty reviews? My guidelines:
- I am clear & specific about what is wrong & why w examples
- I avoid nasty comments abt the paper or author
- If I want a reorg, I outline how & why
- If an author found out I was the reviewer, I wouldn’t be ashamed
- I am clear & specific about what is wrong & why w examples
- I avoid nasty comments abt the paper or author
- If I want a reorg, I outline how & why
- If an author found out I was the reviewer, I wouldn’t be ashamed
Anyway, I review a lot. I see a lot of y'all's reviews from that. I get a lot of reviews.
Some of you are doing great. Some of you need to think about why we do this part of our jobs. And some of y'all are assflaps.
Some of you are doing great. Some of you need to think about why we do this part of our jobs. And some of y'all are assflaps.
