Regression towards the mean—a plea for civility in peer review

Peer review is integral to the ongoing publication of high quality research. In pursuit of this aim, reviewers are expected to provide constructive feedback that helps authors improve their manuscripts.1 All too often, however, peer reviewers fall into the trap of harsh criticism rather than critical evaluation. Common pitfalls include reviews that are overly negative or incredibly brief, give little acknowledgment of the strengths of the manuscript, and use an unfriendly or insulting tone.2An unconstructive rejection or disrespectful review can lead to authors abandoning potentially useful research, instead of revising an article or resubmitting it to alternative journals. In the worst case scenario it could even prompt researchers to give up on research activity and academia altogether.34 Social media are full of examples of the cutting criticism people have received in peer review feedback. Twitter’s @YourPaperSucks collects examples of some of these barbs, including, “I am afraid this manuscript may…
Read Original Article: Regression towards the mean—a plea for civility in peer review »