Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019...
Is the time—manner—place ordering of adverbials an oversimplification?
How can I prevent/balance waiting and turtling as a response to cooldown mechanics
What was the last profitable war?
My mentor says to set image to Fine instead of RAW — how is this different from JPG?
Any stored/leased 737s that could substitute for grounded MAXs?
Why did Bronn offer to be Tyrion Lannister's champion in trial by combat?
What are some likely causes to domain member PC losing contact to domain controller?
How many time has Arya actually used Needle?
newbie Q : How to read an output file in one command line
Inverse square law not accurate for non-point masses?
How do Java 8 default methods hеlp with lambdas?
How could a hydrazine and N2O4 cloud (or it's reactants) show up in weather radar?
3D Masyu - A Die
Should man-made satellites feature an intelligent inverted "cow catcher"?
Is there a spell that can create a permanent fire?
What criticisms of Wittgenstein's philosophy of language have been offered?
Can two people see the same photon?
malloc in main() or malloc in another function: allocating memory for a struct and its members
Is the Mordenkainens' Sword spell underpowered?
Is it OK to use the testing sample to compare algorithms?
latest version of QGIS fails to edit attribute table of GeoJSON file
In musical terms, what properties are varied by the human voice to produce different words / syllables?
Is this Half-dragon Quaggoth boss monster balanced?
Why are current probes so expensive?
Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Handling unsolicited proofs of famous mathematical problemsSuggesting an alternative to referee/reviewer recommendationHow should I handle poor English in reviewing an article that claims to be proofread by two native English speakers?How to React to Incorrect Claims by Reviewers?How to deal with poorly written and formatted papers (as a reviewer)?Published papers with incorrect solutions of famous problems: how to raise concerns with editors?Suggesting connection to one's own paper in a referee reportSuggesting reviewers for a very sectorial double-blind submissionArticle submitted and clearly referee cannot understand basic premise-What to do?Suggesting Reviewers: How to find institutional affiliations
As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.
I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.
Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?
peer-review
|
show 1 more comment
As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.
I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.
Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?
peer-review
1
If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?
– A Simple Algorithm
5 hours ago
1
@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...
– Solar Mike
5 hours ago
3
@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.
– Federico Poloni
5 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.
– A Simple Algorithm
3 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.
I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.
Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?
peer-review
As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.
I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.
Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?
peer-review
peer-review
asked 6 hours ago
OrionOrion
2,57212542
2,57212542
1
If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?
– A Simple Algorithm
5 hours ago
1
@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...
– Solar Mike
5 hours ago
3
@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.
– Federico Poloni
5 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.
– A Simple Algorithm
3 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
1
If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?
– A Simple Algorithm
5 hours ago
1
@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...
– Solar Mike
5 hours ago
3
@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.
– Federico Poloni
5 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.
– A Simple Algorithm
3 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
1
1
If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?
– A Simple Algorithm
5 hours ago
If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?
– A Simple Algorithm
5 hours ago
1
1
@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...
– Solar Mike
5 hours ago
@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...
– Solar Mike
5 hours ago
3
3
@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.
– Federico Poloni
5 hours ago
@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.
– Federico Poloni
5 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.
– A Simple Algorithm
3 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.
– A Simple Algorithm
3 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?
I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.
add a comment |
Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.
add a comment |
A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.
While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.
Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.
add a comment |
You should definitively point them out, the editor might want to get an additional reviewer on those issues, and the authors can still write a nice rebuttal letter saying that the problem confusing you had been thouroughly addressed half a page earlier and they don't feel responsible for your short attention span or your incomplete grasp on English grammar. ;-)
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128469%2fpointing-to-problems-without-suggesting-solutions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?
I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.
add a comment |
Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?
I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.
add a comment |
Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?
I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.
Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?
I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.
edited 4 hours ago
Buzz
15.5k94979
15.5k94979
answered 6 hours ago
Solar MikeSolar Mike
15.8k62755
15.8k62755
add a comment |
add a comment |
Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.
add a comment |
Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.
add a comment |
Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.
Yes, you should point them out. You should point out solutions to problems when you know what the solution is but, at the end of the day, it's the authors' responsibility to write their paper, not yours.
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
30.4k662126
30.4k662126
add a comment |
add a comment |
A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.
While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.
Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.
add a comment |
A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.
While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.
Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.
add a comment |
A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.
While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.
Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.
A story (and many other intersting ones) I once heard from an editorial board member of Physical Review Letters, who gave an overview talk on the editorial process of that journal at a conference, was that sometimes it happens that the reviewer switches sides and becomes a collaborator of the authors they reviewed initially.
While at first this sound strange (certainly did to me at that time as a young PhD student), I think this is more appropriate then outlining new solutions (which is nice but not necessary) the authors did not think of. I also don't think 1-2 major revisions are a good spot to discuss/recommend in-depth new solutions to a manuscript. It's common to request further data analysis/evaluation or additional measurements. But if there are major flaws in the manuscript/methodology, you should point to it, but personally I would advise/vote then to reject the manuscript for this reason.
Concerning grammar and language mistakes: The associate editor can reject publication of a manuscript, even if the peer reviewer don't vote for further revisions (due to content or language level). It's not your duty to improve the language and associate editors regulary recommend commercial english editing services, when the language level is below the standards of the journal. Personally, if I see a lot of spelling and grammar mistakes, I don't point the authors to every single one, I mention 2 or 3 to the editor and the rest is his job, not mine, especially if the manuscript is multi-authored.
answered 1 hour ago
user847982user847982
1,165412
1,165412
add a comment |
add a comment |
You should definitively point them out, the editor might want to get an additional reviewer on those issues, and the authors can still write a nice rebuttal letter saying that the problem confusing you had been thouroughly addressed half a page earlier and they don't feel responsible for your short attention span or your incomplete grasp on English grammar. ;-)
add a comment |
You should definitively point them out, the editor might want to get an additional reviewer on those issues, and the authors can still write a nice rebuttal letter saying that the problem confusing you had been thouroughly addressed half a page earlier and they don't feel responsible for your short attention span or your incomplete grasp on English grammar. ;-)
add a comment |
You should definitively point them out, the editor might want to get an additional reviewer on those issues, and the authors can still write a nice rebuttal letter saying that the problem confusing you had been thouroughly addressed half a page earlier and they don't feel responsible for your short attention span or your incomplete grasp on English grammar. ;-)
You should definitively point them out, the editor might want to get an additional reviewer on those issues, and the authors can still write a nice rebuttal letter saying that the problem confusing you had been thouroughly addressed half a page earlier and they don't feel responsible for your short attention span or your incomplete grasp on English grammar. ;-)
answered 1 hour ago
KarlKarl
1,259514
1,259514
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128469%2fpointing-to-problems-without-suggesting-solutions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
If it ends us as a major revision that comes back to you with changes addressing your issues in some way, how would you decide if they have done so sufficiently?
– A Simple Algorithm
5 hours ago
1
@ASimpleAlgorithm perhaps that is why some papers have more than one review cycle...
– Solar Mike
5 hours ago
3
@ASimpleAlgorithm It is much easier to check that a proposed solution is correct, than to come up with it in the first place.
– Federico Poloni
5 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni that isn't universally true. For example, the proposed solution may be wrong (hence there are very many extremely easy options) whereas the problem of determining if it is correct may be ill-posed or intractable. But my question wasn't necessarily rhetorical. In the kinds of problems you are thinking of, that knowledge of how to determine if a solution is correct can be used to provide guidance or requirements for the authors then when asking for revisions, rather than simply pointing out a shortcoming.
– A Simple Algorithm
3 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni This is basically what the P vs NP problem in computer science is about. :)
– David Richerby
2 hours ago