Thanks for helping me feel like less of an imposter. I don't like rejecting papers. I always recommend for publication but with minor corrections to typo's and a little more clarification of results. I wonder? Is one more likely to be an "imposter" if one is too agreeable as a reviewer? Are people who give harsher critiques the real experts? Thoughts about this??
Good question! In fact, I was the same way when I started as reviewer. The editor has the final decision making to balance out the opinions between all of the reviewers. Typically, an editor would seek both a junior reviewer and a senior reviewer to give their feedback simultaneously. So, quite often when I was giving "major correction" to a problematic paper just trying to be agreeable, the other experienced reviewers would have already suggested "rejection". So I think as a younger reviewer, we can (and we should!) read the other reviewer's feedback and learn how we can become better at reviewing!
Thank you Vera, for finally very lightly addressing the subject of "Impostor Syndrome" in relation to peer review. Wonderful. joe.
Hi Joe, I am glad you like this one, I have to address this topic properly in the near future, perhaps when I overcome my own "Imposter Syndrome"!
@@PhDCoffeeTime 😀 LOL, joe. Vera, come on now, you are FAR from being an impostor.
Love it - from one reviewer to another!! Keep posting Vera!
Glad you liked it.
Check out David's channel because he has also shared a few tips on reviewing papers!
Thank you for your videos, Ma'am.
Glad you like them!
a hardcopy helps too for reviewing
Thanks for helping me feel like less of an imposter. I don't like rejecting papers. I always recommend for publication but with minor corrections to typo's and a little more clarification of results.
I wonder? Is one more likely to be an "imposter" if one is too agreeable as a reviewer?
Are people who give harsher critiques the real experts?
Thoughts about this??
Good question! In fact, I was the same way when I started as reviewer.
The editor has the final decision making to balance out the opinions between all of the reviewers. Typically, an editor would seek both a junior reviewer and a senior reviewer to give their feedback simultaneously.
So, quite often when I was giving "major correction" to a problematic paper just trying to be agreeable, the other experienced reviewers would have already suggested "rejection".
So I think as a younger reviewer, we can (and we should!) read the other reviewer's feedback and learn how we can become better at reviewing!