A German colleague once told me, he reviews 4-6 papers per year, and for each, he spends at most 15 mins.
It is no good for him to review a paper. It is better to save the time for writing his own paper.
Personally, I myself recommend all papers falling onto my lap for publication regardless of the quality. The quality of a paper is up to the readers, not the few referees.
On my side, I also notice that for most papers I got to review, I have not really the expertise to judge the 'quality' of the paper. It seems that the editor sent the paper to me just because I had some paper sharing some keywords in common with that paper. I do not think the second referee is more suitable than me if I reject to review the paper. It is quite random!
Post-publication review is the choice for today's communication technology. You review it if you are interested in it.
No comments:
Post a Comment