To Accept or Reject: Peer Review

Authors

  • William T. Fagan University of Alberta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11575/jet.v24i2.44278

Abstract

Peer review is an established and perhaps essential part of the pubIishing process. ln this study , 1214 review comments by 216 reviewers were analyzed to determine the nature of the reviews and to get a sense of the reviewers by developing profiles based on the nature of the comments. The reviews were categorized according to tone (complimentary, constructive, or negative); direction (specific suggestions for change versus statements of criticism); and focus (the particular aspect of the manuscript which the reviewer selected for comment). In general, the topic/content and methodology were most likely to be selected for comment, which was usually negative. Whereas authors of accepted manuscripts were often given specific suggestions for change, there was little encouragement for the authors of rejected manuscripts. Four reviewer profiles were delineated: critic, conciliator, competitor, and procrastinator. As might be expected, the reviewer profiles were interrelated with the nature of the reviewer comments. Implications for authors, editors, and reviewers are suggested.

Published

2018-05-16

Issue

Section

Articles