I have been authoring and reviewing scientific papers for a while now. And, during the current pandemics these activities have become more intensive for me. So, I want to share some of my experience and views on these two aspects of my career.
Let us begin with the Reviewer side of the story.
1. I dislike when journals ask the question: Is this manuscript among the top x% of
manuscripts in the field?
These are my reasons: (i) Who defines what and whatnot makes part of the x%? (ii) What criteria are used to fix set the x%? (iii) How is this metric unbiased? and, last but not least, (iv) Who am I to set the top x%?
2. I read attentively the Introduction of the paper. This is actually my favorite section of any paper because it reveals the writing style of the authors and it tells if the paper captured the state of the art, set an interesting challenge, how the authors tackled it, and (when the authors are really generous with the reader) what did they learn. In summary, the Introduction rapidly tells you what kind of treat you're in.
3. I check some of the references cited in the paper. I particularly do it when authors interpret their data directly from past works. I have found that authors tend to fall into the "It is known" trap where vague interpretations and misconceptions thrive.
4. Too many times, I find papers where the definite article "The" is wrongfully used. I have opted to recommend authors to watch YouTube videos (which are excellent for learning plenty of useful and interesting things) teaching English Grammar. For the article "The", my favorite is the one made by Oxford English (you can watch it here - I actually do it often!).
5. I pay lots of attention to detail in the experimental section. If the purpose of a scientific publication is to share your discoveries with the community so they can replicate them, why don't tell all of the details of the experiment?
6. I like Tables and Plots whose purpose is discussing the data. These ones help learning new concepts.
7. I rarely recommend rejecting a paper. I was taught by my mentors that reviewing is intended to help authors and not for whipping them with your unfathomable knowledge of the field. In addition, I believe in the old "treat others the way you want to be treated" saying.
@vigabalme
