Page 119 - How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper, 8th Edition 8th Edition

Page 117
All editors, and most authors, will affirm that there is hardly a paper published that has not been improved, often
substantially, by the revisions suggested by referees."

Most journals use anonymous reviewers. A few journals make the authors anonymous by deleting their names from
the copies of manuscripts sent to reviewers. My own experience is in accord with that of the distinguished Canadian
scientist J. A. Morrison, who said (1980): "It is occasionally argued that, to ensure fairness, authors should also be
anonymous, even though that would be very difficult to arrange. Actu-

Page 122
ally, editors encounter very few instances of unfairness and blatant bias expressed by referees; perhaps for 0.1 per cent
or less of the manuscripts handled, an editor is obliged to discount the referee's comments."

If the reviewers have been chosen wisely, the reviews will be meaningful and the editor will be in a good position to
arrive at a decision regarding publication of the manuscript. When the reviewers have returned the manuscripts, with
their comments, the editor must then face the moment of truth.

Ordinarily, editors do not want and cannot use unsubstantiated comments. However, I once asked a distinguished
historian of science to review a book manuscript concerned with the history and philosophy of science. His review
comprised only three sentences, yet it was one of the clearest reviews I have ever seen:

Dear Bob:
I had never before heard of [author's name] and from what there is in the book summary I really don't want to hear of him now. It seems
to me very far removed from any idea I have of science, history, or, indeed, of philosophy. I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.
Cordially,

––––––––––

Much has been written about the peer review process. Fortunately, a book (Lock, 1985) has been published that
contains descriptions and analyses of this literature (281 references). Although many criticisms have been levelled at
various aspects of the peer review system, the fact that it has been used almost universally in relatively unchanged
form ever since about 1750 no doubt proves its worth.

The Editor's Decision

Sometimes, the editor's decision is easy. If both reviewers advise "accept" with no or only slight revision, the editor
has no problem. Unfortunately, there are many instances in which the opinions of the two reviewers are contradictory.
In such cases, the editor either must make the final decision or send the manuscript out to one or more additional
reviewers to determine whether a consensus can be established. The editor is likely to take the first approach if he or
she is reasonably expert

Page 123

file:///C|/...0208%20Books%20(part%201%20of%203)/How%20to%20write%20&%20publish%20scientific%20paper/18.htm[4/27/2009 1:09:12 PM]