I've just been reading an article which is in my area in which the authors essentially put down another author's contribution in order to publish their own paper which claims to be an "improved synthesis". This takes me back to the bad old days of science. This is petty and is the worst science brought about by either the need for adulation or worse the need for some sort of oneupmanship (please excuse the term). What makes this worse is that the later paper relies on the insight of the first author. Science is about gaining knowledge and sharing so my message to all students is simple - never put someone else down in order to look good yourself! Anyway the science editor in charge should stamp out this behaviour.
In some cases, editors are not checking carefully the revision of an article and in some others, are taking decision based on the opinion of the reviewers without checking the content of the arguments expressed by these persons. This is extremely important in cases where the opinions of the author, and the reviewer are very different.
In my opinion, a reviewer is an expert in some specific field. The author is also an expert on the same field. If the reviewer and the author do not agree on the content of an article, the editor must take a decision based on a third opinion. I know some cases where the reviewer made comments on the opinions of the author, and his or her comments have nothing to do with the content with the opinions evaluated.
Many thanks Jorge, I guess with the proliferation of journals this can only get worse.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Ethics