Empirical analysis tells Reviewer 2: “Go F‘ Yourself”

Empirical analysis tells Reviewer 2: “Go F‘ Yourself”

Enlarge (credit: Getty)

Peer review is often the key hurdle between obtaining some data
and getting it published in the scientific literature. As such,
it’s often essential to keeping questionable results out of the
scientific literature. But for vast numbers of scientists with
solid-but-unexciting results, it can be a hurdle that raises
frustrations to thermonuclear levels. So it’s no surprise that many
scientists privately wish that certain reviewers would end up
engaged in activities that aren’t mentionable in a largely
family-friendly publication like Ars.

What was a surprise was to see a peer-reviewed publication make
this wish public. Very public. As in entitling the paper “Dear
Reviewer 2: Go F’ Yourself” levels of public.

Naturally, we read the paper and got in touch with its author,
Iowa
State’s David Peterson
, to find out the details of the study.
The key detail is that the title’s somewhat misleading: it’s
actually Reviewer 3 who’s the heartless bastard that keeps trying
to torpedo the careers of other academics. For the rest, well, read
on.

Read 17
remaining paragraphs

Source: FS – All – Science – News
Empirical analysis tells Reviewer 2: “Go F‘
Yourself”