Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Science and Math Textbooks
STEM Educators and Teaching
STEM Academic Advising
STEM Career Guidance
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Science and Math Textbooks
STEM Educators and Teaching
STEM Academic Advising
STEM Career Guidance
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Science Education and Careers
STEM Academic Advising
How can scientists effectively review papers outside of their expertise?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="andresB, post: 6600099, member: 402469"] A week ago I accepted to review a paper for a top journal. I was contacted because I've published several papers on the same semi-obscure topic in the last two years. I accepted because the abstract was interesting and thought provoking. However, after having access to the full paper I discovered the content to be far away from my expertise. I had to study a lot of new things just to have an idea of what the authors are even saying. Being a reviewer seems to be a very hard job, three weeks to understand and give a solid opinion on a work that condensates months or even years of investigation. So, how people even do this thing called peer review? any advice? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Science Education and Careers
STEM Academic Advising
How can scientists effectively review papers outside of their expertise?
Back
Top