When Bullies Hide Behind Anonymous Reviews To Attack Scientists and Science
Cynthia Mathieu Ph.D. Professor at UQTR - Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Anonymous peer review is a perfect occasion for academic bullies to belittle colleagues. Unfortunately, no one talks about it.
When academics wish to publish their articles in scientific journals, they must navigate a process that involves:
1. Submitting their article through a portal.
2. An editor reads the article to determine if it is a suitable fit or good enough to be sent to peer reviewers, who are experts in the field.
3. The article is either rejected by the editor (a desk rejection) or sent to three experts who will review it anonymously (only the editor knows the reviewers; their names will be removed when their reviews are sent to the article's author).
4. Reviewers read the article and decide whether it should be 1) accepted as is (this rarely occurs), 2) revised and allowed to be resubmitted (commonly referred to as revise and resubmit or R & R), or 3) rejected.
5. The editor receives the three reviews and makes a final decision on the article.
6. The author receives the editor's decision and the anonymous reviewers' comments.
Professors operate within a publish-or-perish work culture. Some universities require their professors to produce a certain number of publications each year.
Publications lead to obtaining research grants and tenure.
Therefore, the peer-review process is almost never contested by authors, giving reviewers and editors much power in their roles.
Behind every article are years of writing research projects, collecting data, supervising students, discussing with colleagues, reviewing the literature, and analyzing data.
Submitting one's work for evaluation is a stressful process that leaves authors vulnerable to the feedback provided by reviewers.
While some reviewers view their role as assisting science and scientists, others perceive it as an opportunity to belittle others, take a political stance, promote their personal agenda, and openly attack the author and their work.
Let me be clear, tough reviews are not easy to receive. However, there is a difference between being critical while making suggestions for improvement and attacking someone.
I have had multiple discussions over the years with colleagues and my students about "nasty" reviews.
No one dares to talk about the psychological impact of receiving these "nasty" comments. Many people feel discouraged, hurt, anxious, and angry; some may even question the relevance of their work and their abilities as researchers.
"It's part of the game" is something we hear often.
It should not be. Bullying is bullying, no matter where it happens.
Behind the article lies an academic, a person.
Reviews matter. They provide much-needed feedback to help us grow as academics.
However, when the feedback is aggressive and belittling, it serves no one.
Anonymous peer reviews are an integral part of an academic career. It should be a safe space where ideas are challenged healthily and respectfully.
Take care of yourself and the people around you 💗