Timeline for Should I simply ignore it if authors assume that I'm male in their response to my review of their article?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9, 2018 at 13:52 | comment | added | penelope | @Ken The question leaves no room for doubt that the OP indeed did refer to "peer review". Clarity of presentation was always part of peer review - data and conclusions need to be both clear and correct. The fact that journals are increasingly expecting the authors and reviewers to take care of grammar and typesetting is a long-know creeping problem. Mentioning the "gravy train" implies you think the OP is being paid for this review - which is almost never true for peer review. It seems, from your answer and comments, that you are not familiar with the academic publishing and review process. | |
| S Nov 8, 2018 at 2:02 | history | suggested | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Copy edited (e.g. ref. <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/male-dominated#Adjective>, <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/face-to-face#Adjective>, and <http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/4645/is-it-ever-correct-to-have-a-space-before-a-question-or-exclamation-mark#comment206109_4645>]
|
| Nov 7, 2018 at 21:04 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Nov 8, 2018 at 2:02 | |||||
| Nov 6, 2018 at 5:55 | review | Low quality posts | |||
| Nov 6, 2018 at 7:01 | |||||
| Nov 6, 2018 at 1:30 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | @Ken Who do you think does "editorial review"? This is a site for people to get expert answers, not guesses from people unfamiliar with academia. | |
| Nov 6, 2018 at 1:28 | comment | added | Ken | @AzorAhai Where does the op state Peer Review? In peer review the data and conclusions are examined. In reviewing a manuscript the grammatical correctness, readability is what is being evaluated; these are two different things. Read the ops question again - you will find the terms editor, author , reviewer and manuscript - all suggestive of editorial review. In either case speak up and kill the gravy train for no reason . Further the editor may not pass anything along to anybody or the authors may simply ignore/forget or pay no attention to the request. In either case speaking up did nothing. | |
| Nov 6, 2018 at 1:07 | comment | added | Azor Ahai -him- | This answer is barely coherent and doesn't suggest the answer-er even knows what peer review is. | |
| Nov 5, 2018 at 2:55 | comment | added | Ken | @StrongBad your quote: 'reviews are supposed to be impartial ... The reviewer is supposed to stay anonymous and conversations with the editors ...' The answer is then quite clear Keep Silent. Further a cultural & gender neutral pen name would be better. | |
| Nov 5, 2018 at 0:17 | comment | added | Marco13 | @StrongBad The anonymity/backlash issue looks like a valid point. But at this level of analysis, it has to be considered in similar forms in similar situations, and as such, is not specific to academia. The broader question is whether someone should complain about everything that she considers as a "microaggression". You can find this everywhere if you're actively looking for it and want to stir things up (that's what I wanted to point out by mentioning the "editress"...). Whether this sort of question and the attention does not do more harm than good? Time will tell. I'm worried. | |
| Nov 4, 2018 at 23:46 | comment | added | StrongBad | @Marco13 reviews are supposed to be impartial and related to the work and avoid personal issues. The reviewer is supposed to stay anonymous and conversations with the editors are generally very limited/non-existent. The number of potential reviewers is limited and there is potential for backlash. If this was a colleague using the wrong gender in a meeting, it would be more general to the workplace. Finally, there is a lot of microagression and sexism in the academic workplace, so even if the question was of general interest, it seems a very good fit here. | |
| Nov 4, 2018 at 23:31 | comment | added | Marco13 | @StrongBad I'm curious what "nuances" and "specifics" you refer to here. As it stands, and as far as I can tell, the question is a classical example of a boat programming question, in that it is totally unrelated to academics in particular and could equally refer to an "accountant and a manager" or a "retail seller and shop owner", and thus, is blatantly off-topic. Maybe you can enlighten me in how far the question is related to any of the topics mentioned in the help center. | |
| Nov 4, 2018 at 14:09 | comment | added | Ken | @StrongBad you are correct, B/C the op does not state 'the specifics about the relationship between a reviewer and an editor and authors' . In other words how these people are known or spread across distance or organization(s), neither the specifics of the environment. So I had hoped some general guidance may be of use to the op in determining a course of action. Her editors may (depending on relationships etc) simply ignore her comments (out of convenience ie the importance test). At which point the short answer is ignore it, let it ride,blow it off. | |
| Nov 4, 2018 at 13:55 | comment | added | StrongBad | This is a reasonable general answer about the workplace but misses the academic nuances and the specifics about the relationship between a reviewer and an editor and authors. | |
| Nov 4, 2018 at 13:21 | history | answered | Ken | CC BY-SA 4.0 |