Misuse of the peer-review system: Time for countermeasures?

Hans Ulrik Riisgård; Otto Kinne; Tom Fenchel; Everett Fee; Ray Hesslein; Jim Elser; Mary Scranton; Jon Cole; Nelson Hairston; Elizabeth Canuel; Ronnie Glud; Claus Nielsen; Peter Beninger; Rune Waagbø; Gro Ingunn Hemre; Gideon Hulata; Tore Høisæter; Donald McLusky; Ron Kneib; Sandra Shumway; Richard Warwick; Lars Hagerman; Poul Scheel Larsen; Jörg Ott; Peter C. Dworschak; Ferdinando Boero; Josep Maria Gili; Katja Philippart; Matthias Seaman

doi:10.3354/meps258297

Misuse of the peer-review system: Time for countermeasures?

Hans Ulrik Riisgård, Otto Kinne, Tom Fenchel, Everett Fee, Ray Hesslein, Jim Elser, Mary Scranton, Jon Cole, Nelson Hairston, Elizabeth Canuel, Ronnie Glud, Claus Nielsen, Peter Beninger, Rune Waagbø, Gro Ingunn Hemre, Gideon Hulata, Tore Høisæter, Donald McLusky, Ron Kneib, Sandra ShumwayRichard Warwick, Lars Hagerman, Poul Scheel Larsen, Jörg Ott, Peter C. Dworschak, Ferdinando Boero, Josep Maria Gili, Katja Philippart, Matthias Seaman

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

15 Scopus citations

Abstract

The peer-review system is overloaded. This causes problems for reviewers and editors. The focus of this Theme Section (TS) is misuse of the peer-review system by repeated resubmission of unchanged manuscripts (mss). A number of editors and experienced reviewers were invited for comments. Most contributors have seen examples of authors resubmitting mss to new journals after rejection without considering the criticisms of former reviewers. No contributor objects to resubmission of mss to other journals, but all object to authors resubmitting a rejected ms practically unchanged to another journal. For some journals this is not a serious problem, but for others this practice is common and it needs to be stopped. It is fair to give authors a chance for a second opinion on their mss. Most authors take reviewer's reports into consideration before sending the ms to another journal, but many never inform the new journal that the ms had previously been rejected.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	297-309
Number of pages	13
Journal	Marine Ecology Progress Series
Volume	258
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3354/meps258297
State	Published - Aug 29 2003

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Aquatic Science
Ecology

Access to Document

10.3354/meps258297

Cite this

Riisgård, H. U., Kinne, O., Fenchel, T., Fee, E., Hesslein, R., Elser, J., Scranton, M., Cole, J., Hairston, N., Canuel, E., Glud, R., Nielsen, C., Beninger, P., Waagbø, R., Hemre, G. I., Hulata, G., Høisæter, T., McLusky, D., Kneib, R., ... Seaman, M. (2003). Misuse of the peer-review system: Time for countermeasures? Marine Ecology Progress Series, 258, 297-309. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps258297

Riisgård, HU, Kinne, O, Fenchel, T, Fee, E, Hesslein, R, Elser, J, Scranton, M, Cole, J, Hairston, N, Canuel, E, Glud, R, Nielsen, C, Beninger, P, Waagbø, R, Hemre, GI, Hulata, G, Høisæter, T, McLusky, D, Kneib, R, Shumway, S, Warwick, R, Hagerman, L, Larsen, PS, Ott, J, Dworschak, PC, Boero, F, Gili, JM, Philippart, K & Seaman, M 2003, 'Misuse of the peer-review system: Time for countermeasures?', Marine Ecology Progress Series, vol. 258, pp. 297-309. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps258297

@article{e77c9db054614e33ac6c06fe1b5b6c89,

title = "Misuse of the peer-review system: Time for countermeasures?",

abstract = "The peer-review system is overloaded. This causes problems for reviewers and editors. The focus of this Theme Section (TS) is misuse of the peer-review system by repeated resubmission of unchanged manuscripts (mss). A number of editors and experienced reviewers were invited for comments. Most contributors have seen examples of authors resubmitting mss to new journals after rejection without considering the criticisms of former reviewers. No contributor objects to resubmission of mss to other journals, but all object to authors resubmitting a rejected ms practically unchanged to another journal. For some journals this is not a serious problem, but for others this practice is common and it needs to be stopped. It is fair to give authors a chance for a second opinion on their mss. Most authors take reviewer's reports into consideration before sending the ms to another journal, but many never inform the new journal that the ms had previously been rejected.",

author = "Riisg{\aa}rd, {Hans Ulrik} and Otto Kinne and Tom Fenchel and Everett Fee and Ray Hesslein and Jim Elser and Mary Scranton and Jon Cole and Nelson Hairston and Elizabeth Canuel and Ronnie Glud and Claus Nielsen and Peter Beninger and Rune Waagb{\o} and Hemre, {Gro Ingunn} and Gideon Hulata and Tore H{\o}is{\ae}ter and Donald McLusky and Ron Kneib and Sandra Shumway and Richard Warwick and Lars Hagerman and Larsen, {Poul Scheel} and J{\"o}rg Ott and Dworschak, {Peter C.} and Ferdinando Boero and Gili, {Josep Maria} and Katja Philippart and Matthias Seaman",

year = "2003",

month = aug,

day = "29",

doi = "10.3354/meps258297",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "258",

pages = "297--309",

journal = "Marine Ecology Progress Series",

issn = "0171-8630",

publisher = "Inter-Research",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Misuse of the peer-review system

T2 - Time for countermeasures?

AU - Riisgård, Hans Ulrik

AU - Kinne, Otto

AU - Fenchel, Tom

AU - Fee, Everett

AU - Hesslein, Ray

AU - Elser, Jim

AU - Scranton, Mary

AU - Cole, Jon

AU - Hairston, Nelson

AU - Canuel, Elizabeth

AU - Glud, Ronnie

AU - Nielsen, Claus

AU - Beninger, Peter

AU - Waagbø, Rune

AU - Hemre, Gro Ingunn

AU - Hulata, Gideon

AU - Høisæter, Tore

AU - McLusky, Donald

AU - Kneib, Ron

AU - Shumway, Sandra

AU - Warwick, Richard

AU - Hagerman, Lars

AU - Larsen, Poul Scheel

AU - Ott, Jörg

AU - Dworschak, Peter C.

AU - Boero, Ferdinando

AU - Gili, Josep Maria

AU - Philippart, Katja

AU - Seaman, Matthias

PY - 2003/8/29

Y1 - 2003/8/29

N2 - The peer-review system is overloaded. This causes problems for reviewers and editors. The focus of this Theme Section (TS) is misuse of the peer-review system by repeated resubmission of unchanged manuscripts (mss). A number of editors and experienced reviewers were invited for comments. Most contributors have seen examples of authors resubmitting mss to new journals after rejection without considering the criticisms of former reviewers. No contributor objects to resubmission of mss to other journals, but all object to authors resubmitting a rejected ms practically unchanged to another journal. For some journals this is not a serious problem, but for others this practice is common and it needs to be stopped. It is fair to give authors a chance for a second opinion on their mss. Most authors take reviewer's reports into consideration before sending the ms to another journal, but many never inform the new journal that the ms had previously been rejected.

AB - The peer-review system is overloaded. This causes problems for reviewers and editors. The focus of this Theme Section (TS) is misuse of the peer-review system by repeated resubmission of unchanged manuscripts (mss). A number of editors and experienced reviewers were invited for comments. Most contributors have seen examples of authors resubmitting mss to new journals after rejection without considering the criticisms of former reviewers. No contributor objects to resubmission of mss to other journals, but all object to authors resubmitting a rejected ms practically unchanged to another journal. For some journals this is not a serious problem, but for others this practice is common and it needs to be stopped. It is fair to give authors a chance for a second opinion on their mss. Most authors take reviewer's reports into consideration before sending the ms to another journal, but many never inform the new journal that the ms had previously been rejected.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141450516&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141450516&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3354/meps258297

DO - 10.3354/meps258297

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:0141450516

SN - 0171-8630

VL - 258

SP - 297

EP - 309

JO - Marine Ecology Progress Series

JF - Marine Ecology Progress Series

ER -

Misuse of the peer-review system: Time for countermeasures?

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this