3 ms·
Yes, unfortunately, it is almost more important to reject the bad papers. The good papers will be published regardless of the reviewer. It takes more work when
by jedbrown 15y ago
Yes, unfortunately, it is almost more important to reject the bad papers. The good papers will be published regardless of the reviewer. It takes more work when I get a bad paper, especially when it comes from someone famous, because I have to make a convincing case for rejection. I've even gotten the same paper multiple times from different journals (after rejection an resubmission). It's hard work to prevent flawed science from being published.