Becoming a publication reviewer
Ravi K
Monday, 23 June 2008 23:55 UTC
I am currently a postdoctoral researcher. For young researchers and professors, sometimes reviewing journal publications is regarded as an accomplishment in itself. So I would like to know how one becomes a reviewer in one of the nature journals. Is it purely on invitation basis, or can one volunteer their services in their area of research?
-
Replies
-
Hello Ravi. Typically, becoming a reviewer is on an invitation basis. At scientific conferences in your field, you could initiate a conversation with an editor in order to express your interest in participating as a peer reviewer.
For more details, please see this recent conversation for more discussion on how reviewers are chosen and for a link to the Nature journal policies on reviewing.
-
I never considered putting the journals I have refereed for in the CV. Is this really considered as a plus ?
-
From my limited point of view, yes. It was brought up in job interviews – I still share your element of surprise and would be interested to hear what other think about the issue. After all, it’s a fairly confidential issue and bragging about the journal feels like a breach of it.
-
it does not need to be a secret that one reviews submitted manuscripts for a journal; in fact many journals acknowledge reviewers in an issue of each volume. However, the manuscripts that you have reviewed may need to be kept confidential (depending on the journal policy).
Several journals give you an opportunity to volunteer for manuscript review and if a manuscript falls in your area of expertise they will consider you. Of course, if you don’t do a good job in reviewing, editors will be reluctant to send you another article for review. -
Rehan is exactly right. Many journals do “list a “Thank you to their frequent reviewers. Of course, it would be a breach of confidentiality if the reviewer revealed exactly which manuscripts s/he reviewed, but reviewers do have the right to be identified to the authors if they explicitly desire. At the journal, however, we discourage this practice.
As opposed to listing the journals for which one has reviewed on a C/V, I have heard that this information becomes important at tenure hearings, providing a means for the assistant professor to demonstrate that s/he is an expert in a particular field, as identified by the editors of a prestigious journal.
-
As well as the conversation to which Noah links, this question was also asked by a scientist in the Nature Nanotech and beyond forum here, and answered by Ai Lin Chun, one of the Nature Nanotech editors.
I picked this up for a From the Blogosphere column in Nature, and there’s also been some conversation responding to that about peer-reviewing, which you can find here.One aspect, as Noah says, is that scientists do many things for their community which are not captured by any metrics. The main metrics are publications, of course, but there are others. Peer-reviewing is one of the many valuable services that is not “captured” in assessment systems. And perhaps it should be. If you are interested in discussing this question, please visit the Citation in Science group, in particular this post I wrote, Better metrics for an individual’s value.
-
hi Ravi,
Given that we do not use a standing board of editorial advisors, we are always on the lookout for good ‘potential referees’. One thing I do when attending conferences is to pay close attention to the question & answer period after a talk. If I notice a young researcher (who is not afraid to get up and ask a question) asking an insightful and relevant question to the speaker(s), then I make a note of this individual and the topic area to perhaps try them as a referee in the future. Thus, it’s good to announce ‘who you are’ when asking questions in such public forums, as you never know who is watching (and why!).
Another lead-in for young referees is to have a senior researcher recommend you to the editor, typically when they might have other priorities and cannot perform the review but are encouraged to suggest others who are knowledgeable in the topic area and therefore qualified to perform a technical review of the material.
-