I have had to withdraw a manuscript I submitted for publication because the reviewer insisted that I include work which I consider tangential to my focus in a paper recently. While I found all their criticisms valuable I considered their insistence for inclusion of particular papers which in my opinion are tangential to the work as unacceptable. It does appear that reviewer's fail to understand an author's perspective and on account of their reviewer status have operated to force their views and orientation on other people's works. They have in many instances completely diverted many an author's view point to their own which practice is only working to narrow perspectives to issues.
Terzungwe Dugeri
Reviewers must recognize strengths and give constructive feedback to assist the author in resolving problems in the work. Some journals want two sets of remarks from reviewers: one for the author and one for the editor exclusively.
It is perfectly OK to disagree with a reviewer's opinion. You can write the editor a point-by-point rebuttal stating why you disagree with the reviewer's proposal. Make sure your response is supported by evidence. If your point of view is well-founded, the editor will take it into account.
Revise your contribution and explain why you didn't change some of the reviewers' remarks. Describe what you changed or did not alter and why in the cover letter and/or the 'Response to reviewers' document. You should withdraw your manuscript. Object to the editor's choice.
People are chosen to review papers because of the trust they have earned as regards expertise in the area of a paper's focus. However, it is appalling that some people get so conceited that they idolise their personal views as the ultimate. A competent Managing Editor would look into the reviewer's recommendations side-by-side with the author's responses. A reasonable author must have complied with a percentage of the recommendations and given convincing reasons for disagreeing the remaining. The editor should respect the fact that it is the author's work and the author primarily takes the blame for whatever goes wrong with the article whether the error originated with him/her or was introduced by a too-know reviewer or an overzealous managing editor. The author, in reciprocity, should note that the journal's reputation, too, is on the line. Having weighed the matter from all logical angles, the journal is free to reject the article or the author withdraws it and sends it to another journal.
I don't think so. Furthermore, some reviewers overstep the limits regarding this aspect. I've had such an experience.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Psychology
- Attitude