peer review

Peer Review, the Nuts and Bolts [Links]

by Jessica Lu July 27, 2012

The first time you peer review a paper can be a stressful, but educational, experience. The article below breaks down the overall peer review process. The guide was written for biology; but 99% of it is useful for astronomers as well. I like that the peer review process is placed into a larger context and […]


Read more →

Peer Review Discussion

by Kelle April 23, 2012

Taking on yet another angle of related to our past discussions about posting to the arXiv before acceptance, citation etiquette, let’s talk about the peer review process. Here are some articles describing the current peer review process: A quick guide to writing a solid peer review, PDF. Nature’s Peer Review Policy Refereeing Wiki Page What’s […]


Read more →

To Post or Not to Post: Publishing to the ArXiv Before Acceptance

by Kelle December 12, 2011

Inspired by a discussion elsewhere, I’d like start an open thread about the pros and cons of posting a paper to the arXiv before it’s accepted by a refereed journal. To get the convo going, here’s my summary of what came out of the previous discussion: Pros to posting before acceptance: Problems and omissions get […]


Read more →

Guidelines for Refereeing Journal Articles [Wiki]

by Kelle February 8, 2011

In collaboration with a few colleagues, I have sketched out a wiki page with some guidelines for refereeing submitted journal articles. Nearly everyone has wildly different expectations of the goals, duties, and time expenditures expected of a referee. At times this leads to combative encounters, complaints to editors, editorial decisions thought to be bizarre by […]


Read more →