1. Being a Reviewer APS Professional Skills Course: Writing and Reviewing for Scientific Journals

2. Purpose of Peer Review Ensure quality, originality, and significance Results support conclusion No errors in citations of previous work All human and animal protocols were reviewed and approved

3. Being a Reviewer Honor Responsibility Service to discipline

4. Invitation to be a Reviewer Do you… –Have the specific expertise? –Have any conflict of interest? –Have the time? –Have the time right NOW? –Have the objectivity to be fair? –Have the discipline to maintain confidentiality? If not, decline the invitation

5. Declining the Invitation Conflict of interest –Working on a similar project –Friends with the authors –Recently trained in same lab (<5 yr) –Recent collaborators (<5 yr) –Biased about this work Not available during this time frame

6. Technical Aspects of Review Scientific quality of MS Writing/graphics quality Novelty and significance of work Rating compared with other work in field Suitability for journal

7. Ethical Aspects of Review Prior approval from IACUC and proper care and use of animals Prior approval for human studies received from humans and institution Plagiarism Confidential treatment of MS and contents Evaluation of MS done in ethical manner

8. Responsibilities Accept invitation to review ONLY if –You have the appropriate expertise –You have the time to do the review promptly –You do not have conflicts or interest –You are able to give an honest, unbiased, and critical assessment Write reviews in collegial, constructive manner Maintain confidentiality about existence and substance of manuscript Report suspected ethical violations Avoid plagiarism

9. Writing the Review Suggested format General comments section –Summarize message of paper –Overriding concerns Specific comments –Major concerns –Minor concerns

10. Experience Issues Look for both positives and negatives Avoid using superlatives Provide constructive criticism English skills for author and reviewer