Don’t be a prig in peer review

Jeff C. Clements reckons with a recent set of reviewer comments that used ‘being critical’ as a justification to be mean. Jeff C. Clements reckons with a recent set of reviewer comments that used ‘being critical’ as a justification to be mean. Credit: Getty Correcting text with red pen

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inNature (London) Vol. 585; no. 7825; p. 472
Main Author Clements, Jeff C.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London Nature Publishing Group UK 17.09.2020
Nature Publishing Group
Subjects
706/648/479
706/648/76
706/689/179
Career Column
Ethical aspects
Humanities and Social Sciences
multidisciplinary
Peer review
Scholarly publishing
Science
Social aspects
United States
Careers
Ethics
Publishing
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Jeff C. Clements reckons with a recent set of reviewer comments that used ‘being critical’ as a justification to be mean. Jeff C. Clements reckons with a recent set of reviewer comments that used ‘being critical’ as a justification to be mean. Credit: Getty Correcting text with red pen
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Commentary-3
content type line 23
ISSN:0028-0836
1476-4687
DOI:10.1038/d41586-020-02512-0