26 votes
Accepted

What are the ethics of reviewing a paper, spotting issues, not raising them in the review, and then trying to publish a paper on the issues?

This seems very unethical as you describe it. I would write immediately to the editor, informing them of what has happened. The editor knows who the reviewer was, of course. It is possible that you ...
user avatar
  • 264k
22 votes
Accepted

Why did I only receive reviews from reviewers 3 and 4?

Most likely they did not respond to the reviewer invitation, or accepted it but did not submit a review in time. The system still logs them as reviewers #1 and #2.
user avatar
  • 103k
22 votes

I received a referee report that was not properly redacted

Let it go. They were doing their job. If their commentary was fair there is nothing for you to do here, but forget about the incident. This is a rather explicit case, but in the future there will be ...
user avatar
  • 7,454
20 votes

Inability to review a conference paper

To convert my comments to an answer: Return the paper to the editors and say that you have hard time reading the paper and suggest they ask a more senior mathematician to evaluate it. Personally, I ...
user avatar
18 votes

Inability to review a conference paper

I do not agree with Kohan that a 2 years PhD student cannot review papers at least in my field (AI & ML). PhD students are often assigned by the PC members as sub-reviewers or directly as PC ...
user avatar
  • 4,601
13 votes

Inability to review a conference paper

As mentioned in the comments, odds are you are too junior to be reviewing this paper. However, you also mention that they're using nonstandard notation, which is not a good sign. You could return the ...
user avatar
  • 103k
12 votes

How far ahead does NSF recruit panelists for proposal review meetings?

Looking back at my records, I have had about a month and a half between my panel invitations and the panel dates. This timing is consistent across pre-COVID in-person panels and the remote panels and ...
user avatar
  • 991
12 votes

What are the ethics of reviewing a paper, spotting issues, not raising them in the review, and then trying to publish a paper on the issues?

There is not necessarily anything particularly unethical going on here. Sometimes as a reviewer you will disagree with the arguments/methods/conclusions of a paper you are reviewing without there ...
user avatar
  • 7,454
9 votes

How far ahead does NSF recruit panelists for proposal review meetings?

A NSF program officer reached out to me for a panel informally about two and a half months before the proposed panel meeting dates. The formal invitation (after I had confirmed, in response to the ...
user avatar
  • 19.1k
7 votes

Inability to review a conference paper

Publishing papers is not just about getting work out there, it is also about making other people understand the work done. As a 2nd year PhD, you are already part of the target audience of papers in ...
user avatar
6 votes

What does the following editor response mean in Physical Review journal? Major revision or minor revision?

It does not really matter whether it is major or minor revision. You are required to revise your paper, respond to reviewers, and reviewers will have another pass at your paper. Anything can happen. ...
user avatar
  • 111
5 votes

I received a referee report that was not properly redacted

TimRias' answer properly addresses how to feel about the referee. As for the broken anonymity, could this be a case where the referee signed their report? Some journals will respect a referee wishing ...
user avatar
  • 18.1k
3 votes

Inability to review a conference paper

I would suggest giving the paper a general fairly positive review, or a lukewarm review, based solely on the high level introduction (if that's what you feel), while providing the lowest confidence ...
user avatar
  • 9,615
3 votes
Accepted

What to do about a dubious competing publication in the same journal I'm submitting to?

My suggestion would be to submit your paper without additional comment. Making comments initially will only slow down the process. If you are asked about your view of the other paper by an editor or ...
user avatar
  • 264k
3 votes
Accepted

What is the difference between Abstract and Author Summary?

For journals that have both, the abstract is typically intended to be a technical summary of the article for the core audience, while the author summary or popular summary is written in a less ...
user avatar
  • 18.1k
2 votes

What does the following editor response mean in Physical Review journal? Major revision or minor revision?

Literally, the comments are "for your consideration". If you respond adequately to all concerns without any edits then you may be fine, depending on what those comments say and your response....
user avatar
  • 264k
2 votes

Why did I only receive reviews from reviewers 3 and 4?

For most journals two reviews is standard, so as the others noted it's likely Revs. 1 and 2 did not submit a review at all, probably because they either forgot or didn't feel like they had sufficient ...
user avatar
  • 121
1 vote

I received a referee report that was not properly redacted

There is a good rule: "If in doubt, do nothing." Other people believe that you should notify the editor. I wouldn't do that, as you cannot be sure the editor would not notify the referee, ...
user avatar
  • 1,019
1 vote

I received a referee report that was not properly redacted

The review is single-blind, so the reviewer had nothing against reviewing your paper knowing you were the author. In their eyes, then, there is nothing awkward. In fact, if the review was fair, there ...
user avatar
  • 6,239
1 vote

Inability to review a conference paper

Well, I have a Master's Degree (not a PhD) and I've reviewed dozens of papers in my career, and I think I was more than sufficiently qualified to review them (even when some were written by PhD's). I ...
user avatar
  • 269
1 vote

What to do about a dubious competing publication in the same journal I'm submitting to?

My suggestion would be to prepare your paper for publication ASAP, which you would have done anyway. You raise a very good point about correcting the record, especially when it comes to public health. ...
user avatar
1 vote

Has there ever been a discussion about the nationalization of academic publishing?

Nationalization is not necessary because government owned publishers already exist. Peruse a list of university presses and you will find many which are publicly owned. There are other government-...
user avatar
1 vote

When writing referee's report after paper revision, can I discuss the reports of other referees?

If the editor sent you the other referees' reports, it clearly means that you are expected to take them into account if you wish so. Otherwise, the editor simply wouldn't have made these other reports ...
user avatar
  • 1,287

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible