Editorial pubs.acs.org/ac
Collaborators, Colleagues, and Friends Need Not Be Listed... And let me list a final category of suggestions to avoid en masse: Nobel Laureates, National Academy members, or researchers who retired long ago. While it may be tempting to “name drop” by only suggesting such individuals, I find that they are less likely to accept given the large number of invitations they receive; thus, they should be listed judiciously. In summary, I urge you to carefully consider your list of suggested reviewers. And remember, your friends, colleagues, and collaborators need not be listed. Your manuscript will receive a better review, and your Editor will thank you.
Y
ou have spent the last month writing your masterpiece, describing a wonderful new approach for measuring the finest details on your favored material! Now is the time to submit the manuscript to your preferred journalAnalytical Chemistry. During the submission process, you are asked to suggest potential reviewers. At times, I have the feeling that authors spend months writing their paper but only a few minutes, at most, thinking about who to suggest as reviewers of their work. First, let me emphasize that your suggested reviewers are important, especially for manuscripts on subjects that are out of the ordinary, and thus, consider them wisely. These names certainly help guide our selection of reviewers: we evaluate your list of reviewers, as well as suitable reviewers that we select on our own, and typically invite a combination of your suggested reviewers and ours. So why am I writing about this? Oftentimes I am surprised at the names submitted by authors. A goal of the review process is to get an unbiased but informed opinion on the science presented in your manuscript. Thus, suggesting names of colleagues from your department or institution does not inspire confidence that these are unbiased reviewers. How can I tell if these are truly impartial experts or individuals you meet with over coffee or tea every week? Even more problematic is suggesting researchers you published with collaboratively within the last year or so. At the very least, such reviewers do not have the appearance of being unbiased, and, consequently, I tend to look at an entire list of suggestions as “biased”. Of course, many suggested names I recognize, but some I do not. How do I proceed? I, and I assume most Editors, do a quick Internet and/or more targeted search on the unfamiliar name. I find it strange when I pull up information on suggested reviewers to find that they have vibrant research programs unrelated to the paper being considered. Although such individuals may not be biased, they also may not be experts on the manuscript’s topic. When acting as an Editor, here are a few questions I ask when trying to select suitable reviewers, which you may find helpful when making your list:
Jonathan V. Sweedler
Have they published in the field related to the manuscript’s subject matter? Are they cited in the manuscript in a meaningful way (which certainly suggests relevant expertise)? Have they reviewed for Analytical Chemistry previously, and are their reviews of high quality? OK, you “got me” on this one: it is not really possible for the author to know, but obviously this is information we have access to and is an important consideration in selecting appropriate reviewers. Another thought in reviewer selection is whether or not the suggested reviewer has published in Analytical Chemistry. Often our authors are our best reviewers, although this criterion certainly has exceptions. © 2012 American Chemical Society
Published: April 18, 2012 3857
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac300956s | Anal. Chem. 2012, 84, 3857−3857
