Timeline for Acknowledgements and reviewer selection
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
2 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 2014 at 4:24 | comment | added | Pete L. Clark | +1 for a good answer. I have to admit that in my mind I was confusing one of the two instances of this that I spoke of with what you talk about in your answer: really more than once I have been chosen, poorly, as a referee based on my having a paper (of very limited relevance) in the bibliography. This practice is the next step on the chain: it's not ethically problematic or inappropriate in any way...it's just evidence that the editor did a rather superficial job. My speculations as to why both practices exist are the same as yours. | |
| Feb 18, 2014 at 12:22 | history | answered | xLeitix | CC BY-SA 3.0 |