Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
complaints such as “the problem could have been investigated more deeply” or
“aspects of the problem were not considered”. Comments of this kind suggest that
the referee is not concerned with making a fair evaluation. If there is a genuine
problem, then describe it, preferably with examples; otherwise say nothing.
Referees should offer obvious or essential references that have been overlooked,
but should not send authors hunting for papers unnecessarily, especially if they are
hard to find. A referee who recommends acceptance requires at least a passing famil-
iarity with the literature—enough to have reasonable confidence that the work is new
and to recommend references as required.
Referees need to be polite. It can be tempting to break this rule (particularly
when evaluating an especially frustrating or ill-considered paper) and be patronizing,
sarcastic, or downright insulting, but such comments are not acceptable.
Some review processes allow for confidential remarks that are not seen by the
author. You can use these remarks to emphasize particular aspects of your review or,
if the editor requested a score rather than a recommendation to accept or reject, to
state explicitly whether the paper should be accepted. You can also use this space to
tell the editor about your own limitations. However, since authors have no opportunity
to defend themselves against comments they cannot see, it is not appropriate to make
criticisms in addition to those visible to the author.
Checking Your Review
When you recommend that a paper be accepted, you should:
Convince yourself that it has no serious defects.
Convince the editor that it is of an acceptable standard, by explaining why it is
original, valid, and clear.
List the changes, major and minor, that should be made before it appears in print,
and where possible help the author by indicating not just what to change but what
to change it to; but if there are excessive numbers of errors of some kind, you may
instead want to give a few examples and recommend that the paper be proofread.
Take reasonable care in checking details such as mathematics, formulas, and the
bibliography.
When you recommend that a paper be rejected, or recommend that it be resubmitted
after major changes, you should:
Give a clear explanation of the faults and, where possible, discuss how they could
be rectified.
Indicate which parts of the work are of value and which should be discarded, that
is, discuss what you believe the contribution to be.
Check the paper to a reasonable level of detail, unless it is unusually sloppy or
ill-thought.
