Peer review is only important to slary committees -- and I would suspose that different universities may well be more or less rigorous in their definitioon of peer review.
Carrol Jim Devine wrote: > > if a journal allows 1 or 2, it's a scandal. > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Gar Lipow<[email protected]> wrote: > > A question about what constitutes legitimate peer review? > > > > As I understand it, authors often suggest peer reviewers for their > > work. In fact this is sometimes a requirement for submissions to > > academic presses or refereed journals. However I'm guessing the > > following would not be legitimate. > > > > 1) The authors spouse is the editor (and also a co-author) and has > > final say in selecting the peer reviewers. > > > > 2) The author and the author's spouse control the board of directors > > for the publication, and the editor selecting the peer reviewers knows > > this. > > > > > > If I were to run into a case of either 1 or 2, would I be right in > > suggesting that the peer review process was not legitimate? Or is this > > a case where usual professional practices would allow 2? > > > > Thanks > > > > Gar > > _______________________________________________ > > pen-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > > > -- > Jim Devine / "All science would be superfluous if the form of > appearance of things directly coincided with their essence." -- KM > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
