ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
EDITORIAL
March 1958, Vol. 30, No. 3 APPLIED JOURNALS, ACS Director o f Publications, C. B. Larrabee Editorial Direcfor, Walter J. Murphy Executive Editor, James M. Crowe Production Manager, Joseph H. Kuney ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY Editor, Lawrence 1. Hallett Managing Editor, Robert 0. Gibbr EDITORIAL HEADQUARTERS WASHINGTON 6, D. C. 1155 Sixteenth St., N.W. Teletype W A 23 Phone Republic 7 4 3 0 0 0. Gladys Gordon, Associate Editors: Stella Anderson, Ruth Cornette, Katherine 1. Biggs, George B. Krantz Assistant Edifors: Betty V. Kieffer, Arthur Poulor, Robert J. Riley, Robert J. Kelley, Hannr 1. Sperr, Ruth M. Howorth, Eugenia Keller, Sue M. Solliday Editorial Assisfanfs: Malvina B. Preiss, Mariorle H. Swenson, Ruth Reynard, Gloria H. Wills Staff Artist: Melvin D. Buckner
BRANCH EDITORIAL OFFICES CHICAGO 3, ILL. Room 926 3 6 South Wobath Ave. Phone State 2-5148 Teletype CO 725 Associate Editors: Howard J. Sanders, Chester Placek Assisfont Editor: Laurence J. White HOUSTON 2, TEX. 718 Melrose Bldg. Phone Fairfax 3-7107 Teletype HO 7 2 Associate Editor: Bruce F. Greek Assistant Editor: Earl V. Anderson NEW YORK 16, N. Y. 2 Park Ave. Phone Oregon 9-1646 Teletype NY 1-4726 Associate Editors: William Q. Hull, Harry Stenerson, David M. Kiefer, D. Gray Weaver, Walter 5. Fedor, Morton Salkind Assisfanf Editor: Louis A. Agnello SAN FRANCISCO 4, CALIF. 703 Mechanics’ Institute Bldg. 5 7 Post st. Teletype SF 549 Phone Exbrook 2-2895 Associafe Editor: Richard 0. Newhall Assistant Editor: David E. Gushee EASTON, PA. 20th and Northampton Sts. Phone Easton 9 1 11 Teletype ESTN Pa 48 Arsociofe Edifor: Charlotte C. Sayre Editorial Assistants: Joyce A. Richards, Elizabeth R. Rufe, June A. Barron EUROPEAN OFFICE Bush House, Aldwych, London Phone Temple Bar 3605 Cable JIECHEM Associate Editor: Albert 5. Nester Contributing Editor: R. H. Muller Advisory Board: R. M. Archibald, W. H. Beamer, H. 0. Casridy, W. D. Cooke, R. M. Fowler, Louis Gordon, J. 1. Hoffman, M. 1. Kelley, E. E. Leininger, W. M. MacNevin, V. W. Meloche, John Mitchell, Jr., E. J. Rorenbaum, R. 0. Russell, A I Steyermark Adver!ising Managernenf: REINHOLD PUBLISHING CORP. 430 Park Ave., N e w York 22, N. Y. (For Branch Offices see p a g e 99 A)
Reviewers: We Thank You Mi’. have neglected for some time to acknowledge appropriately our indebtedness t o hundreds of analytical chemists here and abroad. They are the analytical chemists who help us with every scientific paper listed on the contents page as “contributed articles.” At this very moment some of them are reading the first, second, or even the third draft of articles you will see in our pages a little later. Others are reading articles you will not see in our columns, and of these there were last year some 200 culled from a total of 825 which had been submitted for publication. Whether commending the excellent or criticizing the inferior, analytical reviewers are an ever-growing group of obliging experts on whom the editor calls for advice. Without them his task of choosing the best and the newest from each year’s crop of papers would indeed be a n impossible one. The choice of reviewers is itself not so simple as some seem to think. It is preceded by a careful examination of the manuscript to be reviewed. Then follows a comprehensive search of recent related literature, often still “in press” or even in the process of review, Suggestions from members of ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY’S advisory board receive consideration, and the “reviewer search” culminates in the choice of two candidates from any number of possibilities. Although there are many repeaters, there is no fixed group. Each year new reviewers are added and the present list of potential critics runs into the thousands. Reviewers are chosen not only from the U.S.A. but from every accessible country in the world. .4ir mail has eliminated the distance barrier and the foreign reviewer often outdoes his American counterpart in promptness. Reviewers are asked to comment in full detail. Some offer signed comments; others prefer that the editor alone know the source. There can be good reasons for either choice, and the editor knows that the good review speaks for itself. No editor who has a review system such as ours can escape some headaches as he tries t o speed decisions for an occasional impatient author and get the busy reviewer to respond to deadlines. However, faith on the part of authors and good will on the part of reviewers have helped to create and keep a n overwhelmingly favorable reaction t o our present practice. Even the editor is impressed when longtime authors whose most recent contributions have been severely criticized write : “The comments of both reviewers have been considered in detail in this revision and as a result we feel that the content of this revised manuscript shows considerable improvement over the original draft.” Or “This again brings to my mind the importance and effectiveness of reviewers in improving the quality and readability of our technical literature.” Or “I believe that the reviewing procedure is invaluable in CHEIIestablishing and maintaining the high standards of ASALYTICAL ISTRY.”
What better testimonial and thanks can n-e offer our reviewers?
VOL. 30, NO. 3, MARCH 1958
309
