Skip to main content
5 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Mar 20, 2013 at 22:49 comment added ThomasH This is just an aside, but if reviewing a paper that already cites your work constitutes a conflict of interest (and I agree that it technically does), then it must be an incredibly common conflict of interest for reviewers that are really prominent in their area. Personally, I would like the best researchers in my area to review my papers but I would also, on the whole, trust them to deal with this conflict of interest without it needing to be raised as such.
Mar 16, 2013 at 19:56 comment added JeffE To be clear, a conflict of interest does not automatically require you to recuse yourself from reviewing the paper; it only requires that the conflict be exposed to the editor. (Reviewing a paper that already cites your work also presents a conflict of interest.)
Mar 16, 2013 at 0:39 comment added Anon I agree with Suresh. It may subvert the scholarly record not to cite the relevant literature--whether you are among the authors of that relevant literature is irrelevant. Those who insist a priori there is a conflict of interest may themselves have an interest in not citing the prior work of others. I am very familiar with such cases, having corresponded with authors who had published an axiomatization that had appeared in another form in the Journal of Symbolic Logic the year before. They acknowledged this--it was of interest--but did not correct the papers that came out subsequently.
Mar 15, 2013 at 22:59 comment added JeffE Strictly speaking, I think this situation is a conflict of interest (following the "Washington Post rule"), but one that is appropriately addressed as Suresh describes. However, standards for addressing this situation may differ in different fields.
Mar 15, 2013 at 20:06 history answered Suresh CC BY-SA 3.0