1. Scientific Papers Reviewing the work of others (or : How to kick others ) AND Responding to reviewers (or: How to recover from a good kicking )

2. Dear Dr xx Would you be kind enough to review …….. Why do we review papers? How do editors find reviewers? Should you say yes? (or no, or ignore it?) How many papers should you review? How do you learn to review papers? How do you go about the review? Put it on your cv

3. Do unto others…. Responsibilities of a Reviewer - Expertise –Conflict of interest –Confidentiality –Do it –Be Constructive

4. Think before you write How to do it - Read it respectfully with open mind –Annotate it –Read it again –Think about it –Write your bland review in numbered points

5. Comments to Editor are semi-private Comments to Editor are semi-private Comments to Editor – Novel? Important? Interesting? Journal suitability? – Valid? –Any red flags?

6. How to Kick Others in the Stomach and Have Them and You Feel Good About it. (With grace) Comments to Authors –Good manners, this is not an attack –General –Blow by blow - title, abstract …. –How detailed ? –Not an English major approach

7. Euphemisms are not, as many young people think, useless verbiage for that which can and should be said bluntly; they are like secret agents on a delicate mission, they must airily pass by a stinking mess with barely so much as a nod of the head, make their point of constructive criticism and continue on in calm forbearance. Euphemisms are unpleasant truths wearing diplomatic cologne. Tact and Tactfulness Crisp, Quentin 1908 British Author Crisp, Quentin

8. How you say it matters NoYes Absolute rubbishHas limited appeal Egregious errorAuthors may be mistaken Written by a 3-year oldEnglish would benefit from greater attention The authors are naiveThe authors appear not to have considered Fatally flawedA major concern that may not be able to be remedied

9. Other common questions for reviewers Recommend - Reject, Accept, Revise and reconsider, de novo resubmission? Do you wish to see the revision? Do you think warrants an editorial?

10. Bad Kicking Form Not doing the review Doing it late No comments for author Making it difficult with comments to the author for the editor to reject the paper Getting personal or rude

11. Bad Kicking Form Handwritten review to authors Contacting authors Playing God (my way or the highway) Shooting from the hip Not taking some responsibility for the quality Breaking confidentiality

12. Dear Dr xx, I regret to inform you that we are unable to accept your paper … for publication. ……..

14. How to respond when attacked ? With grace Everything is rejected, but there is rejection and rejection If rejected take your kicks and move on (usually) If your foot is in the door keep kicking If revising do it point by point. Keep it brief, sweat the details

15. How to respond when attacked ? With grace Do what they asked (usually) Show you did what they asked. Proffread Don’t whine, grovel or bite

16. Defense Against Reviewers how to respond when attacked ? Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy. Newton, Howard W. Newton, Howard W.