...but even if it is true, you should tell us why that is so not simply claim it is. And $%@#ing -read- the manuscript so you don't ask questions that have clearly already been addressed in previous versions.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
This is just one of the reasons I sign my own reviews. I'd say it makes my reviews more considered as it forces me to think how to support my statements. I also feel it makes my reviews more civil. But most critically you know it was me, so you can direct your ire accordingly if you feel I'm wrong.
Yea I've also had the same experience from signing (most of) my reviews too. There was a borderline case recently were I considered not signing. But I'm glad I did since I think was ultimately fair to the authors for contextualising where my criticism was coming from.
Yes there can be situations when signing could lead to a potential COI in itself. I had that come up some months ago - although I'd be generally inclined to just say no to reviewing then anyway. Of course, there is the other side of the coin with double-blind reviews where you're not allowed to sign
Long ago I vowed not to play the reviewer-guessing game so I refrain from doing that here. Even though there are some good indications given how much they seem to know about the details in a certain author's papers... Although then again, they also didn't seem to know those papers all that well 😳
Comments