Bean counting

Oct 24 2011 Published by under [Education&Careers]

For the purpose of an annual review and the tabulation of the year's "effort", does re-reviewing a manuscript for the same journal (after it was declined or sent back with major revisions) count as a second review, or as part of one review process?

9 responses so far

  • odyssey says:

    For the bean counters I would say a second review.

  • Heavy says:

    Definitely two.

  • pat says:

    I agree as well...second review !

  • proflikesubstance says:

    I've never really known how to classify the re-review, but it seems odd to count it a second time. Although, these are often just as labor intensive unless it is just a straight out reject.

  • Alex says:

    If the journal sends me two acknowledgment letters, I put both of them in my review packet. If the journal sends me one letter, I roll with it, and accept that some jobs take a lot of time and some don't.

    Besides, while there's a natural desire to want to include everything, above some threshold the specific quantity of reviews that you do is not (usually) something that they care about too much. By all means, document your work as well as you can, but that one extra review will probably not make or break you.

  • Alex says:

    OTOH, when a professional society sent me a gift and thank-you letter saying that I performed an unusually large number of reviews that I performed last year, THAT went into the packet. The precise number is less important than the fact that somebody thought it was a significant number.

  • JaneB says:

    Just as labour intensive = a second review!

  • proflikesubstance says:

    No, adding the extra reviews that come from these second-time-rounders has no impact on my file. That said, I figured I should be consistent.

  • phagenista says:

    two separate emails requesting your expertise, two separate chances to turn them down, it counts as two reviews.

Leave a Reply