A review is more than a suggestion to revise, reject or accept. Also, I take the point of view that if the author cannot convincingly explain her study and findings to an informed reader, then the paper has not met the burden for acceptance in the journal. Do the hypotheses follow logically from previous work?
Then I run through the specific points I raised in my summary in more detail, in the order they appeared in the paper, providing page and paragraph numbers for most.
To submit your questions or ideas, or to simply learn more, see our about us page: I do this because editors might have a harder time landing reviewers for these papers too, and because people who aren't deeply connected into our research community also deserve quality feedback.
Since I am an active researcher and I submit papers, hoping for really helpful, constructive comments, it just makes sense that I do the same for others. I always read the paper sequentially, from start to finish, making comments on the PDF as I go along. It is also difficult from the sparse description to determine exactly why the outcome was as it was.
To me, it is biased to reach a verdict on a paper based on how groundbreaking or novel the results are, for example.
Decide What Makes Things Good or Bad Before you can decide whether something is good or bad, you have to figure out what you mean by "good" and "bad. I consider four factors: Those are all items you can examine and decide if they are well or poorly done.
Jason, our hero, seems to be allergic to work, and while his roommates spend the summer slaving away at a variety of jobs, Jason finds ways to avoid job interviews.
I try to be constructive by suggesting ways to improve the problematic aspects, if that is possible, and also try to hit a calm and friendly but also neutral and objective tone. Data may not be available, a paradigm suggested not appropriate.
By summarizing the single work and reviewing how it was assembled, you can consider how successful the work was at accomplishing the goals it set for itself.
Rejection should be a positive experience for all. You can, and in that case engage, in a dialog with the editor as to why — ideally this is a learning opportunity for all. Could I replicate the results using the information in the Methods and the description of the analysis?
It is not merely a report on some references you found. I then easily could see which papers agreed on which topics, what trends emerged over time and where the controversies in the field lay. In my experience, they are unlikely to write a poor quality review; they might be more likely to accept the invitation, as senior scientists are typically overwhelmed with review requests; and the opportunity to review a manuscript can help support their professional development.
My philosophy is that you're reviewing a paper, not a person or people. Even if a manuscript is rejected for publication, most authors can benefit from suggestions. I almost never print out papers for review; I prefer to work with the electronic version.
Photo courtesy of Matthew Perry. Then I look at how convincing the results are and how careful the description is. Having said that, I tend to define my expertise fairly broadly for reviewing purposes. But that brings up: I often refer back to my annotated version of the online paper.
Step 3 Briefly summarize the literature you find or are assigned. And secondly, how can it be improved? This varies widely, from a few minutes if there is clearly a major problem with the paper to half a day if the paper is really interesting but there are aspects that I don't understand.
Summarize the paper paras.A review paper is not a "term paper" or book report. It is not merely a report on some references you found. Instead, a review paper synthesizes the results from several primary literature papers to produce a coherent argument about a topic or focused description of a field.
How to organize your movie review. Quality of your paper depends on the level of organization you implement. Never underestimate the importance of well-structured outline, regardless of the type of paper you have to write.
How to review a paper. By Elisabeth Pain Sep. 22,PM. It can take me quite a long time to write a good review, sometimes a full day of work and sometimes even longer. The detailed. A common assignment for a research paper is to write a literature review.
However, a literature review has its own structure that is fundamentally different from a generic research paper. While a research paper traditionally involves the development of a new or original thought based on existing.
The big idea. Whenever you're asked to decide whether something is good or bad--and then explain why on paper--you're being asked to write a *review* or *evaluation*.
Write notes to yourself however you want, but try never to let this tone remain in your final review. The correct form is “the paper”; even “the authors” is best avoided unless necessary. My philosophy is that you're reviewing a paper, not a person (or people).Download