Having one's paper rejected by reviewer 2 is always a painful experience. Fortunately, this time, reviewer 1 made my day:
- Reviewer 2: "I am doing a quick turn around on this ms because I do not believe the data are of sufficient interest or significance to merit publication. I wish I could offer a way to salvage the paper."
- Reviewer 1: "Above all I should admit really appreciating the work presented, ranking it as the most interesting I have read over the last few years. Clearly predefined hypotheses; statistical analyses defined prior to data collection; easy access to all data and software; modelling of the empirical observations; and a measurement paradigm novel to our field: the MS has all the ingredients one expects in high quality research. Hence I take the opportunity to thank and congratulate the authors with their work."
#academicmastodon #academicChatter @academicchatter #Reviewer2 #Reviewer2MustBeStopped
In fact, in this case, I think I should complement the classic #Reviewer2MustBeStopped with a #ButPleaseThankReviewer1ForMe
@leovarnet if I were an editor, I'd probably ignore reviewer 2 with that kind of response, and maybe find another reviewer.
@Ear_bele @leovarnet That quote is really something: "I wish I could offer a way to salvage the paper". It reeks of insecurity and smug arrogance, with a slight streak of abusiveness, topped off with total lack of sincerity.
Hopefully the editor will indeed seek another reviewer.
@aebrockwell @leovarnet It reads like they did a very cursory skim and decided it wasn't worth their time, rather than actually engage the subject