Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeDangerous!
Posted by PLOSBiology on 07 May 2009 at 22:16 GMT
Author: Hanna Kokko
Position: prof.
Institution: University of Helsinki
E-mail: hanna.kokko@helsinki.fi
Submitted Date: April 24, 2007
Published Date: April 24, 2007
This comment was originally posted as a “Reader Response” on the publication date indicated above. All Reader Responses are now available as comments.
So... what about those people who get asked to review a lot. I work in a field where mathematically skilled reviewers are in a short supply. As a result, I am typically asked 4-5 times a week if I could review a paper for this or that journal. If I did one per week, and all of them on time, this would still give me a penalty for refusing to do hundreds of manuscripts/year. Hundreds of weeks of accumulating penalty delay per year, even if divided over many journals... I think I could just quit science and start looking for another job right away.
Even if not all reviewers were this busy, the system would form a disincentive to become a good reviewer who provides thorough and thoughtful comments, because editors love good reviewers, and being loved like that is definitely not what one wants in a system where every review request is a potential penalty.