3 ms·

Isn't readability and comprehensibility the job of the editor/journal to check. (after all they're actually paid) maybe not for conference, but peer review is m

Isn't readability and comprehensibility the job of the editor/journal to check. (after all they're actually paid) maybe not for conference, but peer review is more for checking if the methodology, scope, claim, direction, conclusion and relevances is sound&trustable. At least that's my understanding

kergonath 3y ago
The editor is often not the right person to decide based on technical details. Most often, articles they receive anre outside their field of expertise and they don’t really have a way of deciding if a section is comprehensible or not. It’s very difficult for an outsider to know what bit of jargon is redundant and what bit is actually important to make sense of the results. So this bit of readability check falls to the referees. In theory editors (or rather copyeditors, the editors themselves have to handle too many papers to do this sort of thing) should help with things like style, grammar, and spelling. In practice, quality varies but it is often subpar.
kkylin 3y ago
Highly dependent on journal / field. In mine (mathematics) most associate editors work for free, same as reviwers. The reviewer do all the things you say, and in addition try to ensure readability & novelty. Most journals do have professional copy editing, but that's separate from the content review. I don't know how refereed conference proceedings work (we don't really use these). The only journals I know of that have professional editors (i.e., editors who are not active researchers themselves) are Nature and affiiliated journals, but someone more knowledgeble should correct me here.
hedora 3y ago
In CS, the editor / journal don’t do those things. Instead, the reviewers do. (Sometimes reviewers “shepherd” papers to help fix readability after acceptance). Also, most work goes to conferences; journals typically publish longer versions of published works.
jxramos 3y ago
Yes a metadata relationship link would be outstanding. Reproduced in some paper xyz, or by some institution, named individuals, etc. some kind of structured information would be very useful.
kjkjadksj 3y ago
The editor is basically deferring to people with expertise who can put the paper into context better than they could. The editor might be an expert in the field, but they can’ speak for every aspect of it like someone working day to day in that specific aspect of the field could. Sometimes the authors themselves even recommend potentially relevant reviewers for the editor to contact for peer reviewing.
snowwrestler 3y ago
> Isn’t readability and comprehensibility the job of the editor/journal to check Yes, who do you think ask the reviewers to perform their reviews? > peer review is more for checking if the methodology, scope, claim, direction, conclusion and relevances is sound&trustable. No, the parent comment has it right. The only thing being reviewed is the paper, and the point is to make sure it communicates clearly, not that it’s “sound and trustable.”

kergonath 3y ago

The editor is often not the right person to decide based on technical details. Most often, articles they receive anre outside their field of expertise and they don’t really have a way of deciding if a section is comprehensible or not. It’s very difficult for an outsider to know what bit of jargon is redundant and what bit is actually important to make sense of the results. So this bit of readability check falls to the referees. In theory editors (or rather copyeditors, the editors themselves have to handle too many papers to do this sort of thing) should help with things like style, grammar, and spelling. In practice, quality varies but it is often subpar.

kkylin 3y ago

Highly dependent on journal / field. In mine (mathematics) most associate editors work for free, same as reviwers. The reviewer do all the things you say, and in addition try to ensure readability & novelty. Most journals do have professional copy editing, but that's separate from the content review. I don't know how refereed conference proceedings work (we don't really use these). The only journals I know of that have professional editors (i.e., editors who are not active researchers themselves) are Nature and affiiliated journals, but someone more knowledgeble should correct me here.

hedora 3y ago

In CS, the editor / journal don’t do those things. Instead, the reviewers do. (Sometimes reviewers “shepherd” papers to help fix readability after acceptance). Also, most work goes to conferences; journals typically publish longer versions of published works.

jxramos 3y ago

Yes a metadata relationship link would be outstanding. Reproduced in some paper xyz, or by some institution, named individuals, etc. some kind of structured information would be very useful.

kjkjadksj 3y ago

The editor is basically deferring to people with expertise who can put the paper into context better than they could. The editor might be an expert in the field, but they can’ speak for every aspect of it like someone working day to day in that specific aspect of the field could. Sometimes the authors themselves even recommend potentially relevant reviewers for the editor to contact for peer reviewing.

snowwrestler 3y ago

> Isn’t readability and comprehensibility the job of the editor/journal to check Yes, who do you think ask the reviewers to perform their reviews? > peer review is more for checking if the methodology, scope, claim, direction, conclusion and relevances is sound&trustable. No, the parent comment has it right. The only thing being reviewed is the paper, and the point is to make sure it communicates clearly, not that it’s “sound and trustable.”