Even though peer review serves as a mechanism to build in quality control of scientific articles that enter into the archive of scientific knowledge, some reviews are useless (I got back one review and its vagueness, negativity, and pointlessness made wonder if the reviewer had mistakingly sent a review for another manuscript). An article on The Scientist website points out some efforts on improving the peer review processes including horror stories about review worse than the one I provide above. See: https://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/51414/title/How-to-Make-Scientists-Into-Better-Peer-Reviewers/&utm_campaign=TS_DAILY%20NEWSLETTER_2018&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=60643722&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_44vx4cXGja8zn2x8vpxdfOG-BMM1WTcb60fGR63noWt1RqJkrEfzFW8ZbWmCUPhio5ebJF4Z03Z1TKQvSANgFIZ8bsQ&_hsmi=60643722
Comments? -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=52107 or send a blank email to leave-52107-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
