Dear Dr. Fung,

I agree with the view of Prof. Ahmadi-Nedushan that the reviewer must complete and submit his/her review. That is, I do not support the view, an editor to behave according to the scenario of the question.

If I was a reviewer in a similar situation, I would ask the editor about the reason of his/her decision. As Mrs Zaib wrote ‘We researchers need reason for every action’.

If I was the Journal Editor, I would not stop the review process, irrespective of my intentions.

Nevertheless, editors, reviewers etc. must be bounded by certain limits, especially in terms of morality.

Dear Sir,

Though I'm junior yet I can say something about your question. There are two types of reviewers; paid and unpaid. A few editors (who receive great amount from their universities or some other research funding sources to publish research journals) pay to reviewers as honorarium. Mostly editors send a paper to three reviewers and they prefer the first two reports only. If this is the case, so to stop the third reviewer to submit the review report may not be unethical. Editor may refuse because he/she cannot pay to all the three reviewers. Editor is bound. It is the matter of fund. Besides, the scenario, the action of editor seems unethical. He or she has to inform the reviewer the purpose. We researchers need reason for every action.

Regards,

Editors should be careful to select reviewers who have sufficient subject expertise to do justice to the manuscript. Having done so, they must let the reviewers to finish the review. Exceptions are are but may arise . For example, when editor get the information that the reviewer may be biased toward the author(s).

The attached link (Peer review process and editorial decision making at journals) is a good reading on the left review process.

http://www.editage.com/insights/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals

Dear Han Ping Fun,

If the manuscript was sent to the reviewer and if the deadline was observed by the reviewer , then asking the reviewer to stop reviewing will be unethical. However, the predominant attitude regarding editors is that the editor is always right.

Best regards,

R. Biria

Dear Dr. Fung,

I agree with the view of Prof. Ahmadi-Nedushan that the reviewer must complete and submit his/her review. That is, I do not support the view, an editor to behave according to the scenario of the question.

If I was a reviewer in a similar situation, I would ask the editor about the reason of his/her decision. As Mrs Zaib wrote ‘We researchers need reason for every action’.

If I was the Journal Editor, I would not stop the review process, irrespective of my intentions.

Nevertheless, editors, reviewers etc. must be bounded by certain limits, especially in terms of morality.

I think it is completely unethical to stop the reviewer when the due deadline is observed by the reviewer, why don't u ask the reason? u have got the right 2do so.

I did not have any late accepted review recently?!

Such behaviour is unethical and unprofessional.

However, the editor has the right to behave in such a manner.

I have this kind of experiences: But I think it is reasonable in some occasions looking at editor's side and author's side. In case editor get enough feedback to take the decision, then editor should proceed, since authors have the right of getting the answer at earliest from the editor.

see the below (an example I get before the end of deadline or after the deadline (actually can we call is it reviewer deadline?, Usually editor say "if possible please submit before in my experiences, see the Ex2 mail).

-----------------

Ex 1

RE: Manuscript XX-XXXX

Dear XXXXXX,

If you have not yet started your review of the manuscript below, please do not proceed with the assignment

Manuscript Number: XXXXXXXX Title:  XXXXXXXX

We have received sufficient feedback already to make a decision. Although if you have started or can complete your review by the end of the week please send this through to me.

Thank you for your time and continued support of the journal.

With best wishes

-------------------------------

Ex 2

Thank you for agreeing to review the following manuscript:

Reference number: XXXX Article title: xxxxxx

To download the paper now, please click this link: https://www.editoriaxxxxxxxxx

If possible, I would appreciate receiving your review by XXXXXXX.  

----------------------

I beleive that the editors should let the selected reviewer to complete her/his review.

If the editor did not convinced from the reviewing results, he/she can advice more reviewers.