Dear Muhammed,

You raise a delicate and even a moral question. When I am a reviewer for a highly ranked and very respected journal, I always know the comments of other reviewers. I do not judge them in scientific terms with basis on the idea that the editor will be competent and fair enough to juge their quality. If you are sure that the the negative comment is scientifically wrong you should notify the editor. I find this to be even a moral obligation. As you know, the peer-reviewer system and even the final editorial decision are often subject to inbreeding, which is unacceptable in science. Of course, you run the risk of the focal editor not to invite you anymore to review other manuscripts. However, by notifying the editor of your well grounded idea you are acting as a true reseacher and scientist. So, If I were you I would notify the editor.

Best regards

Orlando

Dear Muhammed,

You raise a delicate and even a moral question. When I am a reviewer for a highly ranked and very respected journal, I always know the comments of other reviewers. I do not judge them in scientific terms with basis on the idea that the editor will be competent and fair enough to juge their quality. If you are sure that the the negative comment is scientifically wrong you should notify the editor. I find this to be even a moral obligation. As you know, the peer-reviewer system and even the final editorial decision are often subject to inbreeding, which is unacceptable in science. Of course, you run the risk of the focal editor not to invite you anymore to review other manuscripts. However, by notifying the editor of your well grounded idea you are acting as a true reseacher and scientist. So, If I were you I would notify the editor.

Best regards

Orlando

I would say rejecting an article requires that the reviewer prove his or her reasoning. That means a separate research documentation. To outright reject void of proof simply because one works in the field does not equate to proof. Let me give an example. I am sculptor. I work in many mediums. I specialize in looking for the cheapest, easiest, and lightest ways to sculpt. I began my sculpture career in clay. Clay is heavy. My pieces were 50 or more pounds. I thought news paper would be lighter. I was wrong. It turned out, my pieces were larger because of this hypothesis, heavier, and more difficult to carry. I changed my medium to altered books and junk sculpture. I ran into the same issues. I moved using ordinary puzzle pieces. The work was lighter and smaller, but more delicate and just as difficult to move. The lighter the material, the complicated and detailed I was able to sculpt. If I stayed the same size, the complication and detail made the work more difficult to move. Therefor, if I did not attempt studying the different medium I could not offer advice in any format. My proof of research would have been photographic or video. If I were in your situation, I would back my findings with scientific based research not my opinion, then I would share my findings. Ethically, its a responsibility to share findings with scientific backing. This is one researcher's opinion and may not express the opinions of ResearchGate or leading universities. I know, I would want to know why and where your information would be supported. I hope this helps.

Jeanne

If the manuscript has already been rejected, the journal is unlikely to retract the rejection. But you could advise the editor that you believe the other reviewer was not qualified and made an improper judgement.

I would day that you are NOT REQUIRED to tell the editor this, but it is appropriate, if you decide to do so.

I think nothing is wrong with that.. It is simply called "rebuttals". However, you should give credible scientific reason for them so as to justify your position.

I think that if you notify the editor about such case, you are helping the journal to think twice before engaging such a reviewer next time. If your arguments are ok, the journal might have lost a good article. I myself had a case that one reviewer has accepted my paper with only minor changes and the other has rejected it...I was very confused and have never sent anotherninput for that journal.

If the arguments presented by the reviewer are not worth their salt there is a need to notify the journal

This is a very delicate issue, in my opinion. Personally, I have never contradicted the comments of the other Reviewer, but I try to explain in my review the reasoning behind my comments. In most cases, when the comments of the two Reviewers are contradictory this is due to differences in tehir theoretcal backgrounds.

When it comes to the issue of error, the editor could be notified since submission websites maintain channels of contact with editors. I have experienced a case where four reviewers tended to suggest revision while one reviewer tended to suggest rejection. The paper was rejected.

You should inform the editor if you know that a comment of another anonymous reviewer is wrong with necessary references. I would allow the editor to decide if I think the comments are just unfair.

Thank you all for your valuable replies.

Muhammed

The issue is that you that is one of the reviewer, did you review the said paper very well, that is to standard? If you no you did it to standard then you can send a mail to the chief editor. Because some reviewers do not review this said paper they only recommend reject when they see that the authors are from Africa or the work is related with what they have in mind.

That is why standard journal will tell the author that if they are not ok with the reviewer comment they can ask that the journal send it to another person to review.