Should a graduate student accept random offer to be a reviewer for IEEE Transactions paper?
I have been asked by a well-established professor to review a regular paper submitted to IEEE Transactions, however, I am concerned as in the email, he titled me "Dr. Monkia" although I am still being a graduate student. Of course, I am interested in the paper's topic, but I don't consider myself an expert. He asked if I couldn't review, I can ask a qualified colleague to do so, or let him know immediately.
I had been asked many times to review for predatory conferences or journals, of course, I declined. As far as I know, IEEE transactions are reputed, however, this sounds a little bit weird.
The question: as a graduate student should I accept to review or decline in that case (given the fact I know the topic)?
peer-review review-articles
add a comment |
I have been asked by a well-established professor to review a regular paper submitted to IEEE Transactions, however, I am concerned as in the email, he titled me "Dr. Monkia" although I am still being a graduate student. Of course, I am interested in the paper's topic, but I don't consider myself an expert. He asked if I couldn't review, I can ask a qualified colleague to do so, or let him know immediately.
I had been asked many times to review for predatory conferences or journals, of course, I declined. As far as I know, IEEE transactions are reputed, however, this sounds a little bit weird.
The question: as a graduate student should I accept to review or decline in that case (given the fact I know the topic)?
peer-review review-articles
I'd reject it just because of my experience with IEEE in the past. But you might be interested in looking at academia.stackexchange.com/q/90986/1622 and academia.stackexchange.com/q/16825/1622
– Joe
14 hours ago
Here's a more sinister view: graduate students tend to be 'easy' reviewers given their inexperienced with the process and area. An editor may intentionally send you the paper so that his/her friend's paper goes through more easily. However, this could backfire because some graduate students think this recognition gives them the power to reject a paper if they find any faults, which could be minor and fixable.
– Prof. Santa Claus
8 hours ago
add a comment |
I have been asked by a well-established professor to review a regular paper submitted to IEEE Transactions, however, I am concerned as in the email, he titled me "Dr. Monkia" although I am still being a graduate student. Of course, I am interested in the paper's topic, but I don't consider myself an expert. He asked if I couldn't review, I can ask a qualified colleague to do so, or let him know immediately.
I had been asked many times to review for predatory conferences or journals, of course, I declined. As far as I know, IEEE transactions are reputed, however, this sounds a little bit weird.
The question: as a graduate student should I accept to review or decline in that case (given the fact I know the topic)?
peer-review review-articles
I have been asked by a well-established professor to review a regular paper submitted to IEEE Transactions, however, I am concerned as in the email, he titled me "Dr. Monkia" although I am still being a graduate student. Of course, I am interested in the paper's topic, but I don't consider myself an expert. He asked if I couldn't review, I can ask a qualified colleague to do so, or let him know immediately.
I had been asked many times to review for predatory conferences or journals, of course, I declined. As far as I know, IEEE transactions are reputed, however, this sounds a little bit weird.
The question: as a graduate student should I accept to review or decline in that case (given the fact I know the topic)?
peer-review review-articles
peer-review review-articles
edited 35 mins ago
Bashful Beluga
1033
1033
asked 18 hours ago
Monika
432411
432411
I'd reject it just because of my experience with IEEE in the past. But you might be interested in looking at academia.stackexchange.com/q/90986/1622 and academia.stackexchange.com/q/16825/1622
– Joe
14 hours ago
Here's a more sinister view: graduate students tend to be 'easy' reviewers given their inexperienced with the process and area. An editor may intentionally send you the paper so that his/her friend's paper goes through more easily. However, this could backfire because some graduate students think this recognition gives them the power to reject a paper if they find any faults, which could be minor and fixable.
– Prof. Santa Claus
8 hours ago
add a comment |
I'd reject it just because of my experience with IEEE in the past. But you might be interested in looking at academia.stackexchange.com/q/90986/1622 and academia.stackexchange.com/q/16825/1622
– Joe
14 hours ago
Here's a more sinister view: graduate students tend to be 'easy' reviewers given their inexperienced with the process and area. An editor may intentionally send you the paper so that his/her friend's paper goes through more easily. However, this could backfire because some graduate students think this recognition gives them the power to reject a paper if they find any faults, which could be minor and fixable.
– Prof. Santa Claus
8 hours ago
I'd reject it just because of my experience with IEEE in the past. But you might be interested in looking at academia.stackexchange.com/q/90986/1622 and academia.stackexchange.com/q/16825/1622
– Joe
14 hours ago
I'd reject it just because of my experience with IEEE in the past. But you might be interested in looking at academia.stackexchange.com/q/90986/1622 and academia.stackexchange.com/q/16825/1622
– Joe
14 hours ago
Here's a more sinister view: graduate students tend to be 'easy' reviewers given their inexperienced with the process and area. An editor may intentionally send you the paper so that his/her friend's paper goes through more easily. However, this could backfire because some graduate students think this recognition gives them the power to reject a paper if they find any faults, which could be minor and fixable.
– Prof. Santa Claus
8 hours ago
Here's a more sinister view: graduate students tend to be 'easy' reviewers given their inexperienced with the process and area. An editor may intentionally send you the paper so that his/her friend's paper goes through more easily. However, this could backfire because some graduate students think this recognition gives them the power to reject a paper if they find any faults, which could be minor and fixable.
– Prof. Santa Claus
8 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
It is probably a good thing to do, just for the experience. It will also get you on the good side of the professor.
However, make sure, in accepting, that the professor and others know that you haven't finished your degree yet. That might cause them to withdraw the invitation, of course, but it should be made clear.
1
Of course, I will let him know, however, I don't know how they selected me in that case, is that randomly?
– Monika
18 hours ago
3
Reviewers aren't selected at random. It's possible that you were selected based on some paper you've written or presentation that you have given. One common strategy used by many editors is to ask the authors of papers that are cited in the submitted paper to review it.
– Brian Borchers
13 hours ago
add a comment |
Chances are the editor noticed you authored a paper on a similar topic and is inviting you based on that.
There's no harm doing this. You might feel you're not qualified, but you're being invited, therefore the editor thinks you're qualified. You shouldn't worry about writing a bad review either - full professors can write crappy reviews also, and if you read the paper in detail chances are you're already going to write a better-than-average review! If you're still concerned, you can always talk to your supervisor.
1
I am highly interested, as this is the first time to receive from IEEE Transaction. Do you think I should inform them that I didn't finish my degree?
– Monika
18 hours ago
4
You can if you want, but there's no need to.
– Allure
17 hours ago
add a comment |
The fact that they addressed you as "Dr." doesn't mean anything. In situations like a reviewer invitation, where the editor is sending an email to someone they don't know well, it's common that they will address the email with some generic title like "Dr." or "Professor" even though the title may not actually apply to the recipient. It's just too much trouble for them to look up each person's qualifications and tailor the message accordingly. So I wouldn't consider that by itself to be cause for concern.
The fact that you haven't finished your degree is not a factor, in and of itself, and I don't feel it's necessary to inform the editor of this.
However, like any other reviewer, you need to make an honest judgment as to whether you have the necessary expertise to review the paper. Keep in mind that as a reviewer, the research community is counting on you to decide if this paper belongs in the scientific record in this journal. Some questions to ask:
Have you published in this area yourself?
Are you familiar with other work in this area, so that you would likely know if there are significant related papers that the authors have not cited?
Do you have a good sense of what most researchers in this field know, so that you can judge whether the article contains enough background information (or too much)?
Have you read enough papers in this field to have a clear sense of what makes a paper good or bad? What sorts of results does the community find interesting? What are common errors? What level of detail is expected? Which parts of the paper will need the most careful attention, and which are uncontroversial?
Have you read enough papers from this particular journal or conference to have a sense of the "quality" that they demand, or that their readers expect? Even if the paper is technically accurate and well-written, would you be able to judge if their results are significant enough to be worthy of publication in this particular journal / conference?
The average grad student is less likely to be able to answer "yes" to these, but you know your own background best. If you are not sure, you may wish to consult with your advisor or some other experienced research mentor.
It's true, as some other answerers mentioned, that the editor evidently thinks that you have the necessary expertise, probably based on your previous publication record or recommendations from other reviewers. But you still have to make the decision yourself, as you know yourself better than anyone else does. I don't mean to reinforce impostor syndrome here, but you can't say "the editor thinks I am qualified, therefore I am." I have certainly received papers to review where I knew I didn't know enough to do a good job, even if the editor thought I did. The editor is relying on you to evaluate your own qualifications, and to decline if you don't feel you can do the job properly.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122000%2fshould-a-graduate-student-accept-random-offer-to-be-a-reviewer-for-ieee-transact%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
It is probably a good thing to do, just for the experience. It will also get you on the good side of the professor.
However, make sure, in accepting, that the professor and others know that you haven't finished your degree yet. That might cause them to withdraw the invitation, of course, but it should be made clear.
1
Of course, I will let him know, however, I don't know how they selected me in that case, is that randomly?
– Monika
18 hours ago
3
Reviewers aren't selected at random. It's possible that you were selected based on some paper you've written or presentation that you have given. One common strategy used by many editors is to ask the authors of papers that are cited in the submitted paper to review it.
– Brian Borchers
13 hours ago
add a comment |
It is probably a good thing to do, just for the experience. It will also get you on the good side of the professor.
However, make sure, in accepting, that the professor and others know that you haven't finished your degree yet. That might cause them to withdraw the invitation, of course, but it should be made clear.
1
Of course, I will let him know, however, I don't know how they selected me in that case, is that randomly?
– Monika
18 hours ago
3
Reviewers aren't selected at random. It's possible that you were selected based on some paper you've written or presentation that you have given. One common strategy used by many editors is to ask the authors of papers that are cited in the submitted paper to review it.
– Brian Borchers
13 hours ago
add a comment |
It is probably a good thing to do, just for the experience. It will also get you on the good side of the professor.
However, make sure, in accepting, that the professor and others know that you haven't finished your degree yet. That might cause them to withdraw the invitation, of course, but it should be made clear.
It is probably a good thing to do, just for the experience. It will also get you on the good side of the professor.
However, make sure, in accepting, that the professor and others know that you haven't finished your degree yet. That might cause them to withdraw the invitation, of course, but it should be made clear.
answered 18 hours ago
Buffy
35.5k7113183
35.5k7113183
1
Of course, I will let him know, however, I don't know how they selected me in that case, is that randomly?
– Monika
18 hours ago
3
Reviewers aren't selected at random. It's possible that you were selected based on some paper you've written or presentation that you have given. One common strategy used by many editors is to ask the authors of papers that are cited in the submitted paper to review it.
– Brian Borchers
13 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Of course, I will let him know, however, I don't know how they selected me in that case, is that randomly?
– Monika
18 hours ago
3
Reviewers aren't selected at random. It's possible that you were selected based on some paper you've written or presentation that you have given. One common strategy used by many editors is to ask the authors of papers that are cited in the submitted paper to review it.
– Brian Borchers
13 hours ago
1
1
Of course, I will let him know, however, I don't know how they selected me in that case, is that randomly?
– Monika
18 hours ago
Of course, I will let him know, however, I don't know how they selected me in that case, is that randomly?
– Monika
18 hours ago
3
3
Reviewers aren't selected at random. It's possible that you were selected based on some paper you've written or presentation that you have given. One common strategy used by many editors is to ask the authors of papers that are cited in the submitted paper to review it.
– Brian Borchers
13 hours ago
Reviewers aren't selected at random. It's possible that you were selected based on some paper you've written or presentation that you have given. One common strategy used by many editors is to ask the authors of papers that are cited in the submitted paper to review it.
– Brian Borchers
13 hours ago
add a comment |
Chances are the editor noticed you authored a paper on a similar topic and is inviting you based on that.
There's no harm doing this. You might feel you're not qualified, but you're being invited, therefore the editor thinks you're qualified. You shouldn't worry about writing a bad review either - full professors can write crappy reviews also, and if you read the paper in detail chances are you're already going to write a better-than-average review! If you're still concerned, you can always talk to your supervisor.
1
I am highly interested, as this is the first time to receive from IEEE Transaction. Do you think I should inform them that I didn't finish my degree?
– Monika
18 hours ago
4
You can if you want, but there's no need to.
– Allure
17 hours ago
add a comment |
Chances are the editor noticed you authored a paper on a similar topic and is inviting you based on that.
There's no harm doing this. You might feel you're not qualified, but you're being invited, therefore the editor thinks you're qualified. You shouldn't worry about writing a bad review either - full professors can write crappy reviews also, and if you read the paper in detail chances are you're already going to write a better-than-average review! If you're still concerned, you can always talk to your supervisor.
1
I am highly interested, as this is the first time to receive from IEEE Transaction. Do you think I should inform them that I didn't finish my degree?
– Monika
18 hours ago
4
You can if you want, but there's no need to.
– Allure
17 hours ago
add a comment |
Chances are the editor noticed you authored a paper on a similar topic and is inviting you based on that.
There's no harm doing this. You might feel you're not qualified, but you're being invited, therefore the editor thinks you're qualified. You shouldn't worry about writing a bad review either - full professors can write crappy reviews also, and if you read the paper in detail chances are you're already going to write a better-than-average review! If you're still concerned, you can always talk to your supervisor.
Chances are the editor noticed you authored a paper on a similar topic and is inviting you based on that.
There's no harm doing this. You might feel you're not qualified, but you're being invited, therefore the editor thinks you're qualified. You shouldn't worry about writing a bad review either - full professors can write crappy reviews also, and if you read the paper in detail chances are you're already going to write a better-than-average review! If you're still concerned, you can always talk to your supervisor.
answered 18 hours ago
Allure
26.1k1479128
26.1k1479128
1
I am highly interested, as this is the first time to receive from IEEE Transaction. Do you think I should inform them that I didn't finish my degree?
– Monika
18 hours ago
4
You can if you want, but there's no need to.
– Allure
17 hours ago
add a comment |
1
I am highly interested, as this is the first time to receive from IEEE Transaction. Do you think I should inform them that I didn't finish my degree?
– Monika
18 hours ago
4
You can if you want, but there's no need to.
– Allure
17 hours ago
1
1
I am highly interested, as this is the first time to receive from IEEE Transaction. Do you think I should inform them that I didn't finish my degree?
– Monika
18 hours ago
I am highly interested, as this is the first time to receive from IEEE Transaction. Do you think I should inform them that I didn't finish my degree?
– Monika
18 hours ago
4
4
You can if you want, but there's no need to.
– Allure
17 hours ago
You can if you want, but there's no need to.
– Allure
17 hours ago
add a comment |
The fact that they addressed you as "Dr." doesn't mean anything. In situations like a reviewer invitation, where the editor is sending an email to someone they don't know well, it's common that they will address the email with some generic title like "Dr." or "Professor" even though the title may not actually apply to the recipient. It's just too much trouble for them to look up each person's qualifications and tailor the message accordingly. So I wouldn't consider that by itself to be cause for concern.
The fact that you haven't finished your degree is not a factor, in and of itself, and I don't feel it's necessary to inform the editor of this.
However, like any other reviewer, you need to make an honest judgment as to whether you have the necessary expertise to review the paper. Keep in mind that as a reviewer, the research community is counting on you to decide if this paper belongs in the scientific record in this journal. Some questions to ask:
Have you published in this area yourself?
Are you familiar with other work in this area, so that you would likely know if there are significant related papers that the authors have not cited?
Do you have a good sense of what most researchers in this field know, so that you can judge whether the article contains enough background information (or too much)?
Have you read enough papers in this field to have a clear sense of what makes a paper good or bad? What sorts of results does the community find interesting? What are common errors? What level of detail is expected? Which parts of the paper will need the most careful attention, and which are uncontroversial?
Have you read enough papers from this particular journal or conference to have a sense of the "quality" that they demand, or that their readers expect? Even if the paper is technically accurate and well-written, would you be able to judge if their results are significant enough to be worthy of publication in this particular journal / conference?
The average grad student is less likely to be able to answer "yes" to these, but you know your own background best. If you are not sure, you may wish to consult with your advisor or some other experienced research mentor.
It's true, as some other answerers mentioned, that the editor evidently thinks that you have the necessary expertise, probably based on your previous publication record or recommendations from other reviewers. But you still have to make the decision yourself, as you know yourself better than anyone else does. I don't mean to reinforce impostor syndrome here, but you can't say "the editor thinks I am qualified, therefore I am." I have certainly received papers to review where I knew I didn't know enough to do a good job, even if the editor thought I did. The editor is relying on you to evaluate your own qualifications, and to decline if you don't feel you can do the job properly.
add a comment |
The fact that they addressed you as "Dr." doesn't mean anything. In situations like a reviewer invitation, where the editor is sending an email to someone they don't know well, it's common that they will address the email with some generic title like "Dr." or "Professor" even though the title may not actually apply to the recipient. It's just too much trouble for them to look up each person's qualifications and tailor the message accordingly. So I wouldn't consider that by itself to be cause for concern.
The fact that you haven't finished your degree is not a factor, in and of itself, and I don't feel it's necessary to inform the editor of this.
However, like any other reviewer, you need to make an honest judgment as to whether you have the necessary expertise to review the paper. Keep in mind that as a reviewer, the research community is counting on you to decide if this paper belongs in the scientific record in this journal. Some questions to ask:
Have you published in this area yourself?
Are you familiar with other work in this area, so that you would likely know if there are significant related papers that the authors have not cited?
Do you have a good sense of what most researchers in this field know, so that you can judge whether the article contains enough background information (or too much)?
Have you read enough papers in this field to have a clear sense of what makes a paper good or bad? What sorts of results does the community find interesting? What are common errors? What level of detail is expected? Which parts of the paper will need the most careful attention, and which are uncontroversial?
Have you read enough papers from this particular journal or conference to have a sense of the "quality" that they demand, or that their readers expect? Even if the paper is technically accurate and well-written, would you be able to judge if their results are significant enough to be worthy of publication in this particular journal / conference?
The average grad student is less likely to be able to answer "yes" to these, but you know your own background best. If you are not sure, you may wish to consult with your advisor or some other experienced research mentor.
It's true, as some other answerers mentioned, that the editor evidently thinks that you have the necessary expertise, probably based on your previous publication record or recommendations from other reviewers. But you still have to make the decision yourself, as you know yourself better than anyone else does. I don't mean to reinforce impostor syndrome here, but you can't say "the editor thinks I am qualified, therefore I am." I have certainly received papers to review where I knew I didn't know enough to do a good job, even if the editor thought I did. The editor is relying on you to evaluate your own qualifications, and to decline if you don't feel you can do the job properly.
add a comment |
The fact that they addressed you as "Dr." doesn't mean anything. In situations like a reviewer invitation, where the editor is sending an email to someone they don't know well, it's common that they will address the email with some generic title like "Dr." or "Professor" even though the title may not actually apply to the recipient. It's just too much trouble for them to look up each person's qualifications and tailor the message accordingly. So I wouldn't consider that by itself to be cause for concern.
The fact that you haven't finished your degree is not a factor, in and of itself, and I don't feel it's necessary to inform the editor of this.
However, like any other reviewer, you need to make an honest judgment as to whether you have the necessary expertise to review the paper. Keep in mind that as a reviewer, the research community is counting on you to decide if this paper belongs in the scientific record in this journal. Some questions to ask:
Have you published in this area yourself?
Are you familiar with other work in this area, so that you would likely know if there are significant related papers that the authors have not cited?
Do you have a good sense of what most researchers in this field know, so that you can judge whether the article contains enough background information (or too much)?
Have you read enough papers in this field to have a clear sense of what makes a paper good or bad? What sorts of results does the community find interesting? What are common errors? What level of detail is expected? Which parts of the paper will need the most careful attention, and which are uncontroversial?
Have you read enough papers from this particular journal or conference to have a sense of the "quality" that they demand, or that their readers expect? Even if the paper is technically accurate and well-written, would you be able to judge if their results are significant enough to be worthy of publication in this particular journal / conference?
The average grad student is less likely to be able to answer "yes" to these, but you know your own background best. If you are not sure, you may wish to consult with your advisor or some other experienced research mentor.
It's true, as some other answerers mentioned, that the editor evidently thinks that you have the necessary expertise, probably based on your previous publication record or recommendations from other reviewers. But you still have to make the decision yourself, as you know yourself better than anyone else does. I don't mean to reinforce impostor syndrome here, but you can't say "the editor thinks I am qualified, therefore I am." I have certainly received papers to review where I knew I didn't know enough to do a good job, even if the editor thought I did. The editor is relying on you to evaluate your own qualifications, and to decline if you don't feel you can do the job properly.
The fact that they addressed you as "Dr." doesn't mean anything. In situations like a reviewer invitation, where the editor is sending an email to someone they don't know well, it's common that they will address the email with some generic title like "Dr." or "Professor" even though the title may not actually apply to the recipient. It's just too much trouble for them to look up each person's qualifications and tailor the message accordingly. So I wouldn't consider that by itself to be cause for concern.
The fact that you haven't finished your degree is not a factor, in and of itself, and I don't feel it's necessary to inform the editor of this.
However, like any other reviewer, you need to make an honest judgment as to whether you have the necessary expertise to review the paper. Keep in mind that as a reviewer, the research community is counting on you to decide if this paper belongs in the scientific record in this journal. Some questions to ask:
Have you published in this area yourself?
Are you familiar with other work in this area, so that you would likely know if there are significant related papers that the authors have not cited?
Do you have a good sense of what most researchers in this field know, so that you can judge whether the article contains enough background information (or too much)?
Have you read enough papers in this field to have a clear sense of what makes a paper good or bad? What sorts of results does the community find interesting? What are common errors? What level of detail is expected? Which parts of the paper will need the most careful attention, and which are uncontroversial?
Have you read enough papers from this particular journal or conference to have a sense of the "quality" that they demand, or that their readers expect? Even if the paper is technically accurate and well-written, would you be able to judge if their results are significant enough to be worthy of publication in this particular journal / conference?
The average grad student is less likely to be able to answer "yes" to these, but you know your own background best. If you are not sure, you may wish to consult with your advisor or some other experienced research mentor.
It's true, as some other answerers mentioned, that the editor evidently thinks that you have the necessary expertise, probably based on your previous publication record or recommendations from other reviewers. But you still have to make the decision yourself, as you know yourself better than anyone else does. I don't mean to reinforce impostor syndrome here, but you can't say "the editor thinks I am qualified, therefore I am." I have certainly received papers to review where I knew I didn't know enough to do a good job, even if the editor thought I did. The editor is relying on you to evaluate your own qualifications, and to decline if you don't feel you can do the job properly.
answered 10 mins ago
Nate Eldredge
104k32298398
104k32298398
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122000%2fshould-a-graduate-student-accept-random-offer-to-be-a-reviewer-for-ieee-transact%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
I'd reject it just because of my experience with IEEE in the past. But you might be interested in looking at academia.stackexchange.com/q/90986/1622 and academia.stackexchange.com/q/16825/1622
– Joe
14 hours ago
Here's a more sinister view: graduate students tend to be 'easy' reviewers given their inexperienced with the process and area. An editor may intentionally send you the paper so that his/her friend's paper goes through more easily. However, this could backfire because some graduate students think this recognition gives them the power to reject a paper if they find any faults, which could be minor and fixable.
– Prof. Santa Claus
8 hours ago