Peer Review Quick Guide
***
Common MistakesPrevious MistakeNext MistakePrint This PageExit
***
***
Test Your Knowledge tabReviewer Cometency Manuscript with Substantial Statistical Content tab
 
Sample Paper Excerpt
 
An assistant professor's academic department has expectations that its faculty members engage in service activities, which can include reviewing articles for professional journals. When the assistant professor receives a request from a prestigious business journal to participate in a review of a manuscript, he is inclined to accept after reading the abstract. After receiving the complete manuscript, he discovers the work includes a considerable amount of statistics to explain the concepts and outcomes of the study, something not apparent in the abstract. The assistant professor feels he lacks the necessary training to provide a competent and responsible review of the manuscript's statistics component. Since the reviewer does not wish to retract his agreement to review the article, he asks the department's consulting statistician for advice on the manuscript authors' interpretation of the findings. Although the statistician agrees to provide input, she suggests that her contribution should be acknowledged. Since the assistant professor is the reviewer of record, he feels that it would be unnecessary to disclose the statistician's assistance.
 
Which perspective has a preponderance of support?



 
Proceed to the Next Mistake
 
***
Finished? View Performance Report

***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***Developed 2006 by the Faculty Development and Instructional Design Center, Northern Illinois University.