Collecting the finest real specimens of reviewer comments since 1456. Submit now! http://t.co/guS0m8QxC8
Joined October 2014
- Tweets1.6K
- Following910
- Followers56.8K
- Likes217
Pinned Tweet
“I am afraid this manuscript may contribute not so much towards the field’s advancement as much as toward its eventual demise.”
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
Today's bizarre review comment from an editor at <major medical journal>:
"There is no need to present the values of test statistics (eg, F statistics or chi-squared results) and degrees of freedom when reporting results."
@YourPaperSucks
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
''The only redeeming aspect of this manuscript is that it is so poorly written that it fails to convey the incorrect conclusions drawn here' [from the most recent episode of @quantitudepod on the review process]
"Unfortunately this too is one of the main problems of this review: there is no significant aspect that makes it useful and necessary in the scientific landscape."
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
"Despite promising a very general result this manuscript unfortunately does not deliver (almost) any of the things listed in the abstract."
"Finally, the paper is poorly and hastily written, with typos, poor organization, and poor characterization of the basic work it's built on."
"The paper is long, very long, and got longer. It was hard to get engaged. This a paper about risk factors for voluntary childlessness. There is no meta analysis - why does the material have to be so long?"
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
2/3.How can you write such a condescending thing to anyone? You didn't know you were writing to a colleague I get that, but why not check? I guess my first thirteen first author papers passed you by? #WomenInSTEM #shitmyreviewersays #AcademicTwitter
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
1/3. Why? Why? Why on earth would you start a review like this? Why on earth would you feel the need to patronise and belittle someone even if they were new to publishing and not as it happens a forty year old associate professor who's first language is English!
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
“I have read this paper several times through, and I have nothing to say in its defense.”
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
'The scientific contribution of this paper - if there is any at all - is at best hopelessly insignificant.'
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
'The manuscript presents the resits [sic] of a meta-analysis which seems to be based on very abundant but very poor primary data'
ShitMyReviewersSay retweeted
"If participants were recruited from a university, I imagine they would usually be 18-22 years old. Why does your sample range from 18 to 63? I’m a bit lost here."
