As a graduate student, would you recommend I sign my reviews or keep it blind? On one hand, I side with the idea that everything should be transparent, but I also don't want to my reviews to be dismissed or cause trouble because I'm a student.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @kaitlynmwerner
“Transparency” applies to bases for scientific claims, imo. E.g., we don’t expect ppl to report personal info for sake of “transparency.”
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @siminevazire @kaitlynmwerner
So I’m not sure that signing reviews is important for the kind of transparency I care about. I do sign, but I don’t care if others do.
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @siminevazire @kaitlynmwerner
I think consistently signing or consistently not signing are both ok. Selectively signing can be problematic so good to think it through.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @siminevazire @kaitlynmwerner
Q: What do you think is problematic about selective signing?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I don't sign my reviews mostly because I worry that authors won't like the negative ones (the majority!). It would feel strange to then in effect go "I'm Nick and I recommended your paper be accepted" for the good ones.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Exactly. Signing only positive revs probably isn’t good practice. So need another a priori decision rule to avoid falling into that pattern.
5 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @siminevazire @sTeamTraen and
Here's a fun memory: sitting in a pub when I was a PhD student & being lectured by some drunk mid-career academic who nobody liked that his secret to success was signing his +ve reviews but impersonating his enemies anonymously in his -ve reviews. 10/10 for ethics, mate!
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @chrisdc77 @siminevazire and
When you say impersonate, you mean Dr. X (=drunk mid-career academic who nobody liked) wrote in his -ve reviews "in my lab this and that" when in fact "this and that" were true for his enemy's (Dr. Y's) lab, right?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @siminevazire and
Not so explicit cos then you can get called out by the editor. It was more writing a dismissive review and citing a whole shitload of studies in the review by said enemy (and esp. anything you might know about as in-press cos this implies you really are that person)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Woah, that could backfire and nemesis Y might get a tonne of cites. 
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.