Peer Review Week 2018: meet our reviewers
The theme of Peer Review Week 2018 is ‘Diversity in peer review’. Throughout the week we are showcasing some of our brilliant peer reviewers from around the world. They spoke to us about their experiences as reviewers, and what diversity means to them.
Get involved
Throughout peer review week (10–15 September 2018) we’d like to celebrate everyone who carries out peer review for us. If you do peer review yourself, tweet us a selfie @RoySocChem using #iamareviewer and tell us what you do.
Day four: Jason He, Virginia Tech
Reviewer for Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology
On diversity in peer review…
To me, 'diversity' is more than gender and race. A scientific publication should be judged on its merits – without involving non-scientific factors such as gender, race, or location of authors or reviewers.
I feel 'diversity in peer review' means the participation of reviewers from all stages of their career. I can understand how busy a senior researcher (like myself) could be, but a scientific community needs contributions from everyone. We should also encourage more participation from senior PhD students and postdocs. Mentors of those students can play an important role in helping those senior PhD students in preparing good reviews.
On overcoming challenges…
There are always barriers in one’s career path. As a first-generation immigrant, I must overcome language barriers, cultural barriers, and numerous barriers in obtaining an academic job. There aren’t a lot of short cuts to success other than thinking and working harder than your peers.
On being a reviewer…
In my view, being a reviewer is a service and also a contribution to our scientific community. I believe that as reviewers we should treat a submission as we would want our own submissions to be treated. Peer review is also a great learning experience for early career researchers.
Day three: Professor Vy Dong, University of California, Irvine
Reviewer for: Chemical Science, Organic Chemistry Frontiers, Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry, Green Chemistry, Dalton Transactions, Catalysis Science & Technology, Chemical Communications, ChemSocRev
On diversity in peer review…
It’s paramount to have diverse thoughts and opinions in peer review. While we share similar standards for scientific rigor, having different views and backgrounds allows for more creative science.
On overcoming challenges…
I experience barriers to success and setbacks every day – it’s part of the job requirement as a scientist. Keep optimistic and try to see obstacles as opportunities.
On being a reviewer…
Being a reviewer can feel like a thankless job because you’re anonymous. But for me, I enjoy seeing the papers that I’ve reviewed get published, get press, or get tweeted. I feel I’ve played a role in helping the authors share their science. It’s also important to me to contribute because I rely on my peers, both as an author and editor.
Day two: Professor Rahul Banerjee, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER) Kolkata
Reviewer for 19 Royal Society of Chemistry journals including: Chemical Science, Polymer Chemistry, Nanoscale, PCCP, CrystEngComm, ChemmComm, and RSC Advances
On diversity in peer review…
I think people from all different countries should be given an opportunity to review, providing they are a good reviewer. We know that there is very good science happening in Europe, the UK and the US, but it is important that we try to reach out for reviewers who are based in other countries such as India, Sri Lanka or Malaysia. The RSC is very good at this but there is always scope for improvement.
The perspectives of someone working in India and someone working in the United States could be completely different. It is always better to check for different perspectives and not to stick to one country or region, but to diversify in terms of the reviewer reports.
On overcoming challenges…
For me, a way to overcome any challenge in research is that you collaborate with your colleagues. Collaboration is a very important part of modern research. If you have healthy collaboration then your research is bound to get better and better because each time, you learn something new. I collaborate a lot with a lot of people around the world. We learn a lot from each other and the quality and productivity of our science has improved significantly.
On being a reviewer…
I always enjoy reviewing because every time I get an opportunity to review, I get an opportunity to look into science that's not yet on the market. I get to look at a brand new science. And I also get to learn from reading these new manuscripts. A lot of people feel reviewing is a burden and they need to spend a lot of time doing it but I think this is time well spent.
I always try to say yes to the requests. I believe that it's important we spend a little bit of extra time to review a manuscript, because when I am submitting a paper, I'm expecting a quick response. I'm expecting a fair response and a fair decision. Without reviewers, editors are hampered in their ability to make decisions. Reviewers are probably the most important pillar of scientific publishing.
Day one: Professor Tanja Junkers, Monash University
Reviewer for: JMC A, Soft Matter, Chemical Science, Reaction Chemistry & Engineering, RSC Advances, Polymer Chemistry, PCCP, ChemComm
On diversity in peer review…
Diversity is more and more recognized as an important factor wherever people work together. It’s important on a personal level to have a discrimination free environment, but it’s also important from an economic point of view. By embracing diversity, more viewpoints and approaches to problems can be compared, and especially in a knowledge driven environment such as academia and research this is a very obvious direct benefit.
We simply can’t allow ourselves to limit the pool of ideas to a smaller than possible number of people. The same is true for peer review. More people see more, and that is a good thing.
Diversity is, however, not only a matter of putting diverse people together in a team. It also means to be aware of your own prejudices and privileges. Everybody has those, and it is important to be aware of and to accept them.
Diversity in peer-review ensures that unconscious biases can be reduced and that a diverse range of scientists have equal chances to publish their work, and to apply successfully for research grants. As long as we aren't there yet, visibility is very important. Having some good role models helps young researchers to make their way and teaches them that they can make it in our community regardless of their background. What we need in science is a competition of the best ideas, and not just the best ideas of a certain group, whoever that is.
On overcoming challenges…
My background as a trans woman and female academic has given me a quite unique position as I am able to understand very diverse viewpoints, at least for matters regarding gender diversity. I have, or still am very much experiencing in reality what terms like ‘privilege’ really mean. This is not just an abstract construct for me. I did face discrimination but being trans has also opened some doors for me, so it is not all bad.
Barriers do exist for any non-privileged group, be it a question of gender, race, religion or sexual orientation. The only way to overcome these barriers is to discuss these matters and to be visible. On an individual level it means to stay positive and to keep trying. I still believe that success will come to those who actively chase it, even if some of us need to chase a bit longer than others.
On being a reviewer…
Being a reviewer gives me insights into how other researchers work, and often enough also gives me an interesting peek into topics I would normally not think about in detail. By reviewing, I become a better scientist, and of course it is also nice to see when authors pick up your comments and the published paper has become a better version of the submitted one.
Press office
- Tel:
- +44 (0) 20 7440 3351
- Email:
- Send us an email