Reviewing the second round.

I try to referee papers on the first round so that with high probability  the paper that comes back on the second round is a paper that I can recommend publishing.  If that works, the second round report is easy–short, with some minor changes.  But not always.

My experience as an author and as a referee is that when the first round is wishy-washy, the second round is unsuccessful.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s