Too often "reviewers" become de facto co-authors, and what they build rarely has the vision and insight of the real authors.https://twitter.com/NAChristakis/status/1021024099563425792 …
To be valuable, peer reviewing must be done by your *peers*. "Mediocre grad student reviewing" has mostly negative value. Choose your peers and ask them for honest feedback. If your paper has a "vision", your true peers should be able to see it.
-
-
Mediocre reviewing is indeed problematic but I don't think they necessarily come from grad students. Current as well as "future peers" can both provide low quality reviews, how much comes from one group vs. the other is TBD.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.