Professor Thom Brooks thom.brooks@durham.ac.uk
Professor
This essay offers clear practical advice on how to act as a referee when asked to review an article for an academic journal. The advice is also relevant for reviewing manuscript proposals for academic publishers. My advice is based on my experiences in editing an academic journal, the Journal of Moral Philosophy, and four book series. I will draw on these experiences throughout as illustrations. The structure of the advice is as follows. First, I will begin by saying a few words about the academic publishing industry. Secondly, I will discuss whether one should accept or decline an invitation to review. Thirdly, I will examine the question of what appropriate standard should be applied when reviewing submissions. Finally, I conclude with advice on how to draft a report before submitting it to an editor.
Other Type | Other |
---|---|
Publication Date | 2010 |
Deposit Date | Feb 13, 2013 |
Pages | 1-12 |
Public URL | https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1119332 |
Additional Information | URL of output: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1719043 |
Why Should Guilty Pleas Matter?
(2023)
Book Chapter
Punitive Restoration
(2023)
Book Chapter
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
(2022)
Book Chapter
Capabilities Compatible with Political Liberalism? A Third Way
(2021)
Journal Article
Global Justice and Stakeholding
(2021)
Journal Article
About Durham Research Online (DRO)
Administrator e-mail: dro.admin@durham.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search