Source

Automatically imported from: http://commons.somewhere.com:80/rre/1995/Peer.Review.Guidelines.html

Content

This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.

Peer Review Guidelines!

``` Date: 4 Apr 1995 14:46:46 GMT From: ulemc@cypress.mcsr.olemiss.edu (Elizabeth M. Choinski) Newsgroups: bionet.women-in-bio Subject: Peer Review Guidelines!

I have had some positive feedback about posting my bibliography of peer review guidelines. Please keep in mind that this was orginally put together by me as a handout to give to classes that I talk to about how to do library research. It is short and intended for sciences and engineering. I have only included papers that provide "how to" advice; I have not included papers that discuss the philosophy of peer review nor the efficacy of the peer review system.

PEER REVIEW GUIDELINES

At some early point in your scientific career, you may be asked by a colleague to review a manuscript or grant proposal. The articles and book on this list provide practical guidelines for peer review. If you have been asked by a journal editor to review a manuscript, don't forget to check that journal's guidelines for authors and referees. Funding agencies such as NSF, NIH, EPA, and others will also have specific guidelines for reviewing proposals.

ARTICLES

Forscher, Bernard K. 1965. Rules for referees. SCIENCE 150(15): 319-321. "The duties of the editorial referee are examined to establish efficient and uniform practices."

Forscher, Bernard K. 1980. The role of the referee. SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 1980: 165-169. "The referee answers certain questions to help the editor decide what should be published. Weaknesses in the reviewing system stem from inadequate instruction of referees as to what they should be doing."

Kuyper, Barbara J. 1991. Bringing up scientists in the art of critiquing research. BIOSCIENCE 41(4): 248-250. A checklist is presented which can be used by authors and referees alike to develop or critique a paper.

Markland, Murray F. 1983. Taking criticism - and using it. SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 1983:139-147. "Anyone who wants to be published must be ready to accept criticism, evaluate it, and use it. Rejections can be turned into lessons if the beginning author will learn from them."

Parberry, Ian. 1989. A guide for new referees in theoretical computer science. SIGACT NEWS 20(4): 92-109. "Although aimed primarily at theoretical computer scientists, [this article] contains advice which may be relevant to other mathematical sciences. It may also be of some use to new authors who are unfamiliar with the peer review process."

Smith, Alan Jay. 1990. The task of the referee. COMPUTER 23(4): 65- 71. "Computer researchers have a professional obligation to referee the work of others. This article tells you how to evaluate a paper and write a report using common standards and procedure."

BOOK

Bishop, Claude T. 1984. How To Edit a Scientific Journal. Philadelphia : ISI Press. 138p. This book is geared towards scientists who are acting as editors of professional journals. It contains a chapter on the review process with guidelines for reviewers and samples of specific guidelines from a variety of journals.

This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.