On reviewing loads

I recently ran a poll on Twitter asking academics how often per year they review a paper. The topic did not spark that much discussion, but quite a number of people dit vote in the poll. What I learned is that the majority of people review a few papers per year, whereas some receive a few papers per month.

I found these results interesting, since I am receiving more and more invites to review papers. I enjoy reviewing papers, since it means that I get to read the latest work out there, but at the same time, it's a time-consuming task. And I have the bad habit to postpone reviewing for the weekend, since it feels more like a personal responsibility.

Here are some of my stats from Publons:

How to review a journal paper

At some point during your PhD or in your years after your PhD, you will be asked to review a paper. I've done a fair amount of reviews by now, and have started to keep track of the reviews I write about a year ago by using Publons. You can see my Pulons profile here.

If you receive an invitation to review paper, you need to ask yourself the following questions:
1. Do I have sufficient technical knowledge to review this paper? If not, can I recommend a colleague?
2. Do I have enough time to write this review by the deadline?
3. Do I have a conflict of interest that prevents me from writing an unbiased report?
If you have the time and knowledge it takes to review the paper, and no conflict of interest, you can go ahead and review the paper.

As you read the paper, you need to keep in mind how you will review the paper. A typical review report follows a certain standard form. If you know which elements you need to discuss in your review report, you can pay attention to these while you read the paper. Besides your standard written review report, you may also be asked to fill out an evaluation form on the review website. This post deals only with the basic elements your review report should contain.

A review report usually contains the following elements, often in this order as well:

1. The general information. You can write for example on the first line "Comments on a paper submitted to Journal", followed by the title and then the Manuscript ID.
2. The first heading should be "General comments". In this section you write your review report, in which you focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the presented study.
3. The first paragraph should be a summary in your own words of the manuscript. You can also discuss the possible readership for the manuscript. Is it interesting for researchers, or can it be of value to practitioners?
4. In the next paragraph, discuss if the introduction introduces the topic in the appropriate manner. If not, give suggestions for improvement.
5. Then, discuss the literature review in a paragraph. Are all topics discussed in the manuscript adequately placed within the literature with a thorough literature review?
6. Discuss the methods. Which methods are used? Are the methods appropriate? Are the methods explained in a clear manner? Can you spot weaknesses in the applied methods?
7. How did the authors interpret their results? Are they providing a satisfactory explanation for their observations? How do these observations fit within the body of knowledge of your research field. Are the results used for the development of recommendations? Are these recommendations practice-ready. If there are gaps in the interpretation or possibilities for implementation, point these out.
8. Evaluate the summary and conclusions section. There should be no new information in these sections, and they should be clear for reading.
9. Discuss the writing/language. If the manuscript suffers from serious editorial issues, suggest the authors to send it to a professional proofreading office.
10. Discuss the figures and tables. Are they clear? Do they follow the guidelines of the journal?
11. Write a conclusion of your review report. Summarize in one paragraph your decision (accept, minor revisions, major revisions, reject) and give the main reasons for this decision.
12. The second heading of your review report should read "Technical/Editorial comments." Add a table with detailed technical and editorial comments below your general comments section. You can use the following columns: Page - Lie - T/E - Comment to organize your more detailed comments.

If you want some more inspiration about how to review a paper, you can read the guidelines of Hugh Davis, Shriram Krishnamurthi , and Barak Pearlmutter. Veronika Cheplygina focused on how to become a reviewer, and Science magazine has an interesting article with the experiences of different scholars in reviewing journal papers.

Writer's Lab: Editing your writing, paperless-style

After finishing my PhD last June, I've been working on the articles that I would like to publish from my dissertation.
I've left my home in Delft after my defense, and since then I've been homeless living in different houses. All my writing needs to be done on my personal laptop, and I'm limited an external backup, a Kindle, a smartphone, scratch paper, pens, my planner and my calculator as office-tools.

Within these limitations, I've needed to go paperless as much as possible. Writing my most recent draft articles has been a fully digital work.

I used to print out every single draft, mark it up in pencil while reading in a quiet place, and then making the changes into the file again. Without a printer and a space to leave paper, my good old workflow process was not an option anymore.

In the past, I used to think that I could only catch typos when I print out my work and read over it.

Myth is debunked.

If you are to review a paper, and want to use a digital method, here are a few tips I can give you:

1. Check your figures in a PDF at 400% magnification

If you want to check how your images will be printed, convert them into a PDF (assuming that you will deliver your final draft in PDF form), and use a 400% magnification tool in your Adobe Reader. At 400% magnification, you get an idea of the quality of your figure in print. If the image has blurred lines at this 400% zoom, then alter your figure. Ideally, use the .EPS format for your images.

2. Use full screen reading

Throw out the distractions and read by using the full screen reading option. Most word processing programs allow for making changes while you use the full screen reading mode, so make your changes immediately as you see your mistakes.

3. Try to convince co-authors to use track changes

If you want to go from a printing-marking up-editing type of workflow towards a fully digital method, try to convince your co-authors to use track changes or to add their comments to your document. Implementing the changes from co-authors through track changes is about the simplest thing out there to accept their feedback.

4. Enroll your tablet or e-reader

If, for some reason, you need to read your document and gather information from it, consider using your tablet or e-reader. When I needed to compile the list of notations from a paper, I converted the file to PDF, put it on my Kindle, and hunted for notations, while typing out the list into the active document in MS Word.

5. Use your digital signature

You really don't need to print, sign, and scan documents anymore when you write your consent to publish. Almost all publishers now accept a digital signature in a PDF. It's super easy to set up your digital signature, and you'll create a password to safeguard your signature.

6. If necessary, scan with a smartphone app

If, for some reason, your digital signature is not accepted, and you need to print and sign a document, but don't have a scanner available, then consider using your smartphone as a scanner. I've used DocScan, and even though the quality is not ideal, it serves the purpose.

7. Get a second screen

If you can, get a second screen. I'm spending too much time in different places, defined by what I can put into my carry-on bag, but if you try to go paperless from an office, add an extra monitor. It's the best thing since slices bread.

8. Use reference management software

For quick citing, use a reference management software tool that is incorporated into your word processing software. I used Endnote and MS Word (very basic), and it makes citing the easiest thing in the world.

Have you writing and editing all from one machine, without printing the draft and marking up? Share your experience and tips!