Conference Paper What Does a Fourth Reviewer Mean
Peer Review for Conference Proceedings versus Journals: is there a difference?
Is there really any difference between peer reviewing papers for a conference or for a periodical? It depends on whom you are talking to. The Editors of a periodical will tell you to put the utmost care and effort into their reviews for the sake of the scientific tape. The Organising Committee of the conference may tell you to do the same thing. The author will tell you either mode the paper is fantastic.
A paper or a poster presented at a conference can appear similar a crude block of marble; fabricated of stiff stuff, only unfinished and coarse. Skilful peer review is like a sculptor, chipping away at the unnecessary parts, sanding the rough edges and buffing information technology out to a high shine, ready to be admired by the world. The skills needed at each phase are the same, but are needed in unlike amounts depending on how close the project is to completion. It's upwards to the Editors of the publication to guide the reviewers and advise which skills are needed, and set the tone for the peer review procedure.
In general, scientific journals ask reviewers to report on four aspects of the paper: its significance, novelty, rigour and originality. These journals can accept long-standing reputations to uphold (or reputations they wish to develop) and require the reviewers to help them maintain this standard. Whilst conferences likewise have reputations to maintain, with irresolute Organising Committees and Proceedings Editors comes a change in tone, to match the changes in the scientific field. Organising Committees want to accept the most recent, novel and heady results presented at their briefing, with reviewers that tin can assist pick out the all-time piece of work and indicate the work that may not be the well-nigh original.
Reviewing papers for journals volition e'er have an element of prestige. Scientists take information technology as a betoken of pride to say "my review was trusted by the Editors of this respected journal and my comments and criticisms were acknowledged". There are also now many ways in which you lot tin be rewarded for reviewing for journals, from discounts on Open Access publications to Publons, even to recognition as the Reviewer of the Twelvemonth. The piece of work submitted to journals has almost always already been read past the author'south colleagues, and been checked before submission. The reviewer'due south job at this stage is to assist the paper be the best it tin be, and sand of the rough edges. In that location is much satisfaction to be gained from the hard piece of work of reviewing for journals.
Reviewing for conferences may require using the same skills, simply the rewards are very unlike. The Editors of proceedings cannot offering you lot Publons recognition, only y'all volition see the most recently discovered results and guide the work at it's most formative phase. By engaging with the work of a scientific community at this phase you tin can stay at the cutting edge of enquiry guide the work from the very beginning. Sometimes, you tin also contribute your own work to the project and assistance discover new, even more exciting results. Each individual paper is a snapshot of a researcher's project, and past engaging with the project at this early stage new opportunities for understanding will be bachelor to you.
Collectively, a record of a conference reflects the state-of-the-fine art research at the time of the conference, and over a larger period of time for a continuing series of conferences. Conferences are also the preferred publication method for researchers in industry, being the place where the most up-to-date research can be establish. Information technology tin too contain cloth not often establish in other journals, such as inconclusive or negative results. Proceedings can also exist a fantastic learning tool for students on how to write papers and enquiry results. The results included in conference proceedings are inclusive and various.
Conferences besides offer experience in dissimilar kinds of peer review that traditional journals do not accept the flexibility to implement. Our Peer Review Policy for IOP Briefing Series states that information technology's up to the Organisers and proceeding Editors to choose the method the peer review; we do not impose any kind of peer review on the proceedings. Conference proceedings can be the testing ground for new methods of peer review; we come across many proceedings that went through double-blind review, open peer review or at least iii rounds of review. The choice is peer review model is left with the all-time possible people; the Proceedings Editors and Organisers that are masters of the subject field matter and are a part of the community, and understand what volition help the community grow.
Ultimately, peer review is about asking you, the proficient in the field, for your input on recent work and to aid shape it into even better piece of work. For all the much debated and well documented flaws in peer review, information technology's the dominant method of substantiating the quality of work before publication. Whether information technology'south a conference proceedings paper, freshly-hewn from the mountain, or a submitted newspaper, polished and pristine, to help ascertain the well-nigh meaning, novel, rigorous and original work in your field.
Take an animated tour of our peer review process here!
This post was written past Stephanie Gill, our briefing publishing coordinator. Stephanie works on IOP Conference Serial, which includes: Periodical of Physics: Conference Serial, IOP Conference Series: Materials Scientific discipline and Technology and IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License
Categories: JPhys+
Source: https://jphysplus.iop.org/2017/09/13/peer-review-for-conference-proceedings-versus-journals-is-there-a-difference/
0 Response to "Conference Paper What Does a Fourth Reviewer Mean"
Post a Comment