Category Archives: peer review

The Fourth Reviewer: More suggestions about suggesting reviewers

Tim Vines is an evolutionary ecologist who found his calling in the process of peer review. He was Managing Editor of Molecular Ecology from 2008 to 2015, launched The Molecular Ecologist in 2010, and is the founder and Managing Editor … Continue reading

RedditDiggMendeleyPocketShare and Enjoy
Posted in community, peer review, science publishing, The Fourth Reviewer | Leave a comment

The Fourth Reviewer: Help! A reviewer just contacted me directly.

Tim Vines is an evolutionary ecologist who found his calling in the process of peer review. He was Managing Editor of Molecular Ecology from 2008 to 2015, he launched The Molecular Ecologist in 2010, and he’s the founder and Managing … Continue reading

Posted in community, peer review, science publishing, The Fourth Reviewer | 2 Comments

Introducing The Fourth Reviewer

Tim Vines is an evolutionary ecologist who found his calling in the process of peer review. He was Managing Editor of Molecular Ecology from 2008 to 2015, launched The Molecular Ecologist in 2010, and is now the founder and Managing … Continue reading

Posted in community, peer review, science publishing, The Fourth Reviewer | 1 Comment

To review or not to review, that is the question

Imagine this scenario. You are industriously working away on your most recent paper (ignoring other pressing data analyses, administrative duties, and grant proposals). You have just begun to get into the zone of intense focus, writing nirvana, when DING!!! a … Continue reading

Posted in career, peer review, science publishing | 3 Comments

Molecular Ecology’s best reviewers 2015

(Flickr: Kathrin & Stefan Marks) As a continuation of our post from last year, Molecular Ecology is publishing a list of our very best referees from the last two years (2013 and 2014). Our hope is that the people listed … Continue reading

Posted in housekeeping, Molecular Ecology, the journal, peer review, science publishing | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The results are in for the journal selection survey

Two weeks ago I wrote a post about a recent paper by Salinas and Munch that presented a model-based method for determining to which journal an author should submit a manuscript for publication. I was curious to know how the readers … Continue reading

Posted in career, Impact Factors, methods, peer review, science publishing | 2 Comments

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?*

[We want to know what you think! Please click on the link at the bottom of the post to complete a short survey and/or share your thoughts about the publishing process in the comments section below] For better or worse, … Continue reading

Posted in career, funding, Impact Factors, peer review, science publishing | 1 Comment