TBH, I think it might be subtle bribe in that they hope that by having us
review their text we might be more motivated to use the text. Keep in
mind the social psychology principle that if you can alter people's
behaviors, sometimes such will result in altering their attitudes. At
times I have told publishers I will review their text but feel no need for
remuneration. But, upon reflection, I realize that such doesn't actually
alter the impact of 'being given the honor' of being asked to be a
I think we all should ask ourselves and the publisher WHY we are being
asked to review their textbook; i.e., what qualifications lead them to
choose us? If it appears to be a relatively random process, possibly we
should be concerned about their motives. If not, then go for it as I'm
all for improving the content of the psychology 101 textbooks available.
Joan Warmbold Boggs
Professor of Psychology
Carol Devolder asked, 'If a publisher pays me an honorarium to review a
> potential text, are they paying me to be honest or are they paying me to
> say only good things about the book?"
> I can't speak to the publishers' motivations. They may well think/hope
> they're paying you for a good review, or at least for some useable quotes.
> But you should give an honest review. The worst that can happen is that
> they won't ask you again. Besides, it's not like they're paying you big
> bucks. The meager stipend would appear to be prima facie evidence that
> they're not trying to bribe you.
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com.
To unsubscribe click here:
or send a blank email to