As a "peer reviewer" for a scientific journal, when reviewing citations (Reference Section) of a manuscript you are asked to review by the journal editor,
1. "How do you access the citations" to "check their accuracy and appropriateness" in the paper"?
2. If you do not access the citations to check their accuracy and appropriateness, what is meant by reviewing citations as part of the peer review process?
Dennis
Dennis Mazur
Presumably, one is chosen as a peer reviewer because of their expertise in the field, which means the reviewer is likely to be familiar with a lot (admittedly not all) of the literature cited. In fact, I view it as one of my tasks as a reviewer to see what is included or not in the citations--i.e. if there is a good mix of primary and secondary literature (since I'm a historian of science); the currency of the material cited, citation of classic vs. new material, key scholars in the field, the representation of multiple POV's etc. I will occasionally look up a source or two if I find the way in which they're cited odd or unfamiliar--but for the most part trust the author (particularly if the paper is well written). At the risk of tooting my own horn, here's a link to an article I wrote about things in papers that serve as red flags for me as a peer reviewer (there's a lot in it about bibliographies):
https://falconediting.com/en/blog/writing-mistakes-that-raise-red-flags-with-peer-reviewers
Hope that's helpful
best
NS
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Citations