Inside my little head, there are many benefits to reviewing journals and grants.
For new faculty, getting grants to review should be an obvious win. Journals are a bit less awesome, but I enjoy seeing what caliber of work people are submitting to various journals. Also, some journals show the status of your reviewed papers, so I can see if the other reviewers/editors agreed with my assessment. I'm also a bit maniacal and enjoy the power that's bestowed upon me when reviewing.
But what about fringe benefits?
Does any Tenure and Promotion committee care about what journals I review or how many I do in a year? If I'm reviewing top field level journals on a regular basis, is that part of the magic equation?
Do the editors (usually esteemed tenured faculty) remember their reviewers? I ask this because I'm curious if, when the time comes, I can list them as potential letter writers? Will they be familiar with my research or remember that I wrote some great reviews for them?
Finally, and only tangentially related, are editors at these mega publishing firms in collusion? I always seem to get papers to review in waves and always at times when I think I can relax or dedicate some extra time to research.
For new faculty, getting grants to review should be an obvious win. Journals are a bit less awesome, but I enjoy seeing what caliber of work people are submitting to various journals. Also, some journals show the status of your reviewed papers, so I can see if the other reviewers/editors agreed with my assessment. I'm also a bit maniacal and enjoy the power that's bestowed upon me when reviewing.
But what about fringe benefits?
Does any Tenure and Promotion committee care about what journals I review or how many I do in a year? If I'm reviewing top field level journals on a regular basis, is that part of the magic equation?
Do the editors (usually esteemed tenured faculty) remember their reviewers? I ask this because I'm curious if, when the time comes, I can list them as potential letter writers? Will they be familiar with my research or remember that I wrote some great reviews for them?
Finally, and only tangentially related, are editors at these mega publishing firms in collusion? I always seem to get papers to review in waves and always at times when I think I can relax or dedicate some extra time to research.
Does any Tenure and Promotion committee care about what journals I review or how many I do in a year? If I'm reviewing top field level journals on a regular basis, is that part of the magic equation?
ReplyDeleteIt's not completely meaningless as a sign that you are an active contributor to your field(s), but pretty close.
Do the editors (usually esteemed tenured faculty) remember their reviewers?
Yes, but only vis a vis their editorial duties.
I ask this because I'm curious if, when the time comes, I can list them as potential letter writers? Will they be familiar with my research or remember that I wrote some great reviews for them?
No. It would be absurd to list someone you know only as an editor for whom you reviewerd as a letter-writer for promotion and tenure.
Finally, and only tangentially related, are editors at these mega publishing firms in collusion? I always seem to get papers to review in waves and always at times when I think I can relax or dedicate some extra time to research.
No. If anything, they are in anti-collusion. Sometimes the editorial content management system allows editors to see how many reviews a reviewer has recently completed or pending even for other journals within the publisher's portfolio, and decent editors won't overload a reviewer.
Thanks for the response. As a follow up question, is there a process/protocol that editors follow to approach new potential reviewers. I recently was asked to review a paper in a journal that I've never published in and I've never heard of the manuscript authors. Do editors scan websites or does someone search Web of Science for related work? Do they look at publication and citation numbers of the reviewers?
ReplyDeleteReviewing for somebody doesn't mean they will be a reference that you can use, but good editors remember good reviewers and sometimes even send personal messages thanking you. This is a sign that they appreciate you and you should use it as a conversation starter at conferences. Make them part of your network, get them excited about your work, and recommend them as editors for your papers. If they are familiar with your work and are impressed then they should be fair game for letters.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the advice. As an amusing side note, I received another manuscript to review on Friday (Dec 23rd) with a due date of January 6th. There is a link in the email to accept the review, but no link to decline.
ReplyDelete