ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Scientific Reviewing

Eugene Garfield's commentary ("An Old Proposal For A New Profession: Scientific Reviewing," The Scientist, Aug. 19, 1996, page 12) elegantly reiterated the importance of scientific reviewing. However, the commentary did not recognize that one of the main reasons there are not many reviews from young scientists is the difficulty the not-yet-established have in getting reviews published. I, like many other young scientists, would love to take a break from heavy bench work to write review article

Qingjian Wang

Eugene Garfield's commentary ("An Old Proposal For A New Profession: Scientific Reviewing," The Scientist, Aug. 19, 1996, page 12) elegantly reiterated the importance of scientific reviewing. However, the commentary did not recognize that one of the main reasons there are not many reviews from young scientists is the difficulty the not-yet-established have in getting reviews published.

I, like many other young scientists, would love to take a break from heavy bench work to write review articles in my fields, knowing there is a chance for their publication. I was fortunate to have published a couple of review papers because I was a coauthor of an established expert. Otherwise, the reality of trying to publish a scientific review by a young postdoc is usually a waste of time.

Until the climate in publication circles changes (more emphasis on a review's quality rather than the author's name), to suggest writing...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?
ADVERTISEMENT