Peer Review Guidelines!

[Elizabeth M. Choinski]

  I have had some positive feedback about posting my bibliography of
peer review guidelines.  Please keep in mind that this was orginally
put together by me as a handout to give to classes that I talk to about
how to do library research.  It is short and intended for sciences and
engineering.  I have only included papers that provide "how to" advice;
I have not included papers that discuss the philosophy of peer review
nor the efficacy of the peer review system.

PEER REVIEW GUIDELINES

	At some early point in your scientific career, you may be asked
by a colleague to review a manuscript or grant proposal.  The articles
and book on this list provide practical guidelines for peer review.  If you
have been asked by a journal editor to review a manuscript, don't forget 
to check that journal's guidelines for authors and referees.  Funding
agencies such as NSF, NIH, EPA, and others will also have specific 
guidelines for reviewing proposals. 

ARTICLES

Forscher, Bernard K. 1965. Rules for referees. SCIENCE 150(15): 319-321.
	"The duties of the editorial referee are examined to establish
	efficient and uniform practices."

Forscher, Bernard K. 1980. The role of the referee. SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING
	1980: 165-169.
	"The referee answers certain questions to help the editor decide
	what should be published.  Weaknesses in the reviewing system
	stem from inadequate instruction of referees as to what they
	should be doing."

Kuyper, Barbara J. 1991. Bringing up scientists in the art of critiquing
	research. BIOSCIENCE 41(4): 248-250.
	A checklist is presented which can be used by authors and
	referees alike to develop or critique a paper.

Markland, Murray F. 1983.  Taking criticism - and using it. SCHOLARLY
	PUBLISHING 1983:139-147.
	"Anyone who wants to be published must be ready to accept
	criticism, evaluate it, and use it.  Rejections can be 
	turned into lessons if the beginning author will learn from
	them."

Parberry, Ian. 1989. A guide for new referees in theoretical computer
	science. SIGACT NEWS 20(4): 92-109.
	"Although aimed primarily at theoretical computer scientists,
	[this article] contains advice which may be relevant to other
	mathematical sciences.  It may also be of some use to new
	authors who are unfamiliar with the peer review process."

Smith, Alan Jay. 1990. The task of the referee.  COMPUTER 23(4): 65-
	71.
	"Computer researchers have a professional obligation to referee
	the work of others.  This article tells you how to evaluate
	a paper and write a report using common standards and 
	procedure."

BOOK

Bishop, Claude T. 1984.  How To Edit a Scientific Journal.
	Philadelphia : ISI Press. 138p.
	This book is geared towards scientists who are acting as
	editors of professional journals.  It contains a chapter on
	the review process with guidelines for reviewers and samples
	of specific guidelines from a variety of journals.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Elizabeth Choinski, Science and Technology Bibliographer
J.D. Williams Library
University of Mississippi           VOICE 601-232-7910     FAX 601-232-7477
University, MS 38677                E-MAIL ulemc at cypress.mcsr.olemiss.edu