I lately got surprised to see so many review papers written by authors who have no track record publication in the area. I think this is a major draw back and largely fails the purpose of review paper, its quality and its impact. People just get drawn into writing review papers looking at the high impact papers of the journal. I wish to request chief editors of journals to look into this matter seriously.
Regardless of the qualification or title, a paper will be welcomed and appreciated for the pertinence, importance, novelty, ethical robustness of its information and the ideas it triggers, readers will accept, agree, develop if they are convinced, question or be indifferent if they are not . What is important is to keep the faire review process uniformly and equally applied to all submissions, with no bypassing of protocols to anybody, to avoid the tags of authoritative X or Y who prove sometimes to be biased, oriented or catastrophic if their ideas and writings were not properly reviewed.
Yes. I have noticed some review articles written by budding reseachers and their influencial supervisors from reputed institutions make it published in good Journals. This is against the standard and established practice. A review article must be written by an expert author who has mastered his field of research. One should have worked several years and contributed more articles in his field. Usually, leading journals invite such authors to write a review paper. One can not submit a review paper just like regular paper. One requires prior permission and consent from the Editor if the journal is a reputed leading journal. Sometimes bypassing of protocols happen with publishers.
Regardless of the qualification or title, a paper will be welcomed and appreciated for the pertinence, importance, novelty, ethical robustness of its information and the ideas it triggers, readers will accept, agree, develop if they are convinced, question or be indifferent if they are not . What is important is to keep the faire review process uniformly and equally applied to all submissions, with no bypassing of protocols to anybody, to avoid the tags of authoritative X or Y who prove sometimes to be biased, oriented or catastrophic if their ideas and writings were not properly reviewed.
I agree with Dr. Karaki. Review articles written by "experts" in the field tend to be biased by the personal and professional experiences. There have been incidences of "authoritative" experts pushing their own agendas to maintain funding, obtaining academic advancements,etc. (No names as not to disparage, but we all know of them). Encouraging younger researcher to explore and present topics allows for an opportunity for a different perspective. It is important not to "drink the Kool-Aid", the world might not be flat, after all.
Appropriate review is the best manner of ensuring quality.
Regards,
Christopher
Really very rigorous without expertise, I agree your statement. I saw many articles in Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews related to solar. A review article must be written by an expert author who has published so many experimental manuscript in same topic.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals