Timeline for How to handle a paper by a reviewer who wants to be paid?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2018 at 2:40 | comment | added | Allure | @StijndeWitt you might be interested in the lecherous millionaire (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecherous_millionaire). In this thought experiment, the millionaire offers the woman an extra option she would not otherwise have had, but still seems to be behaving inappropriately. | |
| Sep 17, 2018 at 21:13 | comment | added | Stijn de Witt | @DanRomik Sorry but the linked discussion is about tutoring a student that is following your class and you are grading (power difference). I think it is beside the point. You are not normally expected to give away private time for free. But if the reviewer were to charge the author I think there would be a clear conflict of interest (as in the linked article), but as he is charging the paper I don't see such conflict (as it is the paper's interest to have high quality reviews). | |
| Sep 17, 2018 at 21:02 | comment | added | Dan Romik | @StijndeWitt yes, charging your student for tutoring would be unacceptable. See here for more discussion on this. | |
| Sep 17, 2018 at 20:21 | comment | added | Stijn de Witt | @DanRomik "Well, there are situations where it would count against you to give an additional option of being paid for something you are normally expected to do for free.". Well, outside of the army, household duty or, apparently academics I can not find many examples where people are supposed to give away personal belongings (which time really is) for free. "If a student comes to me asking for an extra office hour" I am not sure exactly what you mean by that... if this student is asking you to tutor them in your spare time, would charging for that be unacceptable? I would hope not. | |
| Sep 17, 2018 at 15:29 | comment | added | cbeleites | @DanRomik: all employment contracts I've had in academia did consider reviewing as part of my professional duties. In that sense, I have been paid for reviewing (yes, I've been working overtime - but that's an entirely different discussion IMHO, there was also lots of overtime not going into reviewing...). | |
| Sep 14, 2018 at 15:51 | comment | added | Nuclear Hoagie | @DavidRicherby Reviewing has non-zero value for reviewers. It can fulfill a sense of duty or contribution to the scientific community, it can add to a CV, or it can be good practice for critical assessment of literature. No one would be a reviewer unless they got something out of it, which typically comes in the form of non-monetary intangibles. For this person, the intangibles aren't worth it. They consider their time more valuable than what they'll get out of it, so they want cash to make up the difference. The fact that reviewers get zero pay doesn't mean they get zero value from it. | |
| Sep 14, 2018 at 15:30 | comment | added | David Richerby | I find your first sentence confusing. Reviewing is paid zero and everybody's time is worth more than zero. | |
| Sep 14, 2018 at 4:04 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Sep 14, 2018 at 5:06 | |||||
| Sep 14, 2018 at 2:34 | comment | added | Dan Romik | @JiK Why would suggesting that count against them? Well, there are situations where it would count against you to give an additional option of being paid for something you are normally expected to do for free. If a student comes to me asking for an extra office hour, saying no is reasonable, but saying I will only do it if the student pays me is obviously unacceptable. | |
| Sep 13, 2018 at 18:27 | comment | added | JiK | +1 The person in question declined to review. They gave the journal an additional option of paying them to get them to review anyway. Why should suggesting that count against them? | |
| Sep 13, 2018 at 12:43 | history | edited | Nuclear Hoagie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 27 characters in body
|
| Sep 13, 2018 at 12:32 | history | answered | Nuclear Hoagie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |