Reviewing Peer Review

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  04 Jul 2008:
Vol. 321, Issue 5885, pp. 15
DOI: 10.1126/science.1162115

eLetters is an online forum for ongoing peer review. Submission of eLetters are open to all. eLetters are not edited, proofread, or indexed.  Please read our Terms of Service before submitting your own eLetter.

Compose eLetter

Plain text

  • Plain text
    No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

  • Quality Control for Peer Reviewers

    The Editorial by B. Alberts, B. Hanson, and K. L. Kelner ("Reviewing peer review," 4 July 2008, p. 15) and the Letter by M. Raff et al. ("Painful publishing," 4 July 2008, p. 36) raise issues on reviewing that are often the topic of conversation between scientists. Peer review can serve an important function by offering advice that improves a manuscript and/or its science. Too often, reviews are destructive and unprod...

    Show More
    Competing Interests: None declared.

Stay Connected to Science

Navigate This Article