How to review a scientific paper
A review process is a key factor which ensures reliable and accurate presentation of new, useful, and original scientific knowledge to the public. Despite of many shortcomings which this evaluation of scientific work has, it is still an indispensable part of the process of scientific publishing. Dif...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Engineering Society for Corrosion, Belgrade
2017-09-01
|
| Series: | Zaštita Materijala |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.zastita-materijala.org/index.php/home/article/view/516 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849765364227899392 |
|---|---|
| author | Aleksandar Dekanski Ivana Drvenica Olgica Nedić |
| author_facet | Aleksandar Dekanski Ivana Drvenica Olgica Nedić |
| author_sort | Aleksandar Dekanski |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | A review process is a key factor which ensures reliable and accurate presentation of new, useful, and original scientific knowledge to the public. Despite of many shortcomings which this evaluation of scientific work has, it is still an indispensable part of the process of scientific publishing. Different types of reviews have emerged throughout history, but the essence of the process itself has remained unchanged: before publishing, scientific results are subjected to unbiased, competent, and reliable assessment of their validity and originality. Unfortunately, neither worldwide, nor in our country, there is systematic and institutionalized education for performing such responsible task. The knowledge on review process is taught by senior colleagues, or is acquired through personal experience over time. As each young scientist is a potential reviewer, this article Is primarily intended for young people, as a manual, instruction on how to review a scientific paper and what should be kept in mind when the review report is written. After the analysis of the review process, ethical principles to which a reviewer should adhere to are highlighted, and finally, article intends to answer a question: How to review a scientific paper critically, correctly, and objectively? At the end, it is suggested how the review report should look like. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-ccfba368c8ef454d9e3ba2d8413e4ece |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 0351-9465 2466-2585 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2017-09-01 |
| publisher | Engineering Society for Corrosion, Belgrade |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Zaštita Materijala |
| spelling | doaj-art-ccfba368c8ef454d9e3ba2d8413e4ece2025-08-20T03:04:53ZengEngineering Society for Corrosion, BelgradeZaštita Materijala0351-94652466-25852017-09-0158325927010.5937/ZasMat1703259D515How to review a scientific paperAleksandar Dekanski0Ivana Drvenica1Olgica Nedić2University of Belgrade, Institute of Chemistry, Technology and Metallurgy - IChTM, SerbiaUniversity of Belgrade, Institute for Medical Research, SerbiaUniversity of Belgrade, Institute for the Application of Nuclear Energy - INEP, SerbiaA review process is a key factor which ensures reliable and accurate presentation of new, useful, and original scientific knowledge to the public. Despite of many shortcomings which this evaluation of scientific work has, it is still an indispensable part of the process of scientific publishing. Different types of reviews have emerged throughout history, but the essence of the process itself has remained unchanged: before publishing, scientific results are subjected to unbiased, competent, and reliable assessment of their validity and originality. Unfortunately, neither worldwide, nor in our country, there is systematic and institutionalized education for performing such responsible task. The knowledge on review process is taught by senior colleagues, or is acquired through personal experience over time. As each young scientist is a potential reviewer, this article Is primarily intended for young people, as a manual, instruction on how to review a scientific paper and what should be kept in mind when the review report is written. After the analysis of the review process, ethical principles to which a reviewer should adhere to are highlighted, and finally, article intends to answer a question: How to review a scientific paper critically, correctly, and objectively? At the end, it is suggested how the review report should look like.https://www.zastita-materijala.org/index.php/home/article/view/516peer review processethical principlesconstructive criticismsocial evaluation |
| spellingShingle | Aleksandar Dekanski Ivana Drvenica Olgica Nedić How to review a scientific paper Zaštita Materijala peer review process ethical principles constructive criticism social evaluation |
| title | How to review a scientific paper |
| title_full | How to review a scientific paper |
| title_fullStr | How to review a scientific paper |
| title_full_unstemmed | How to review a scientific paper |
| title_short | How to review a scientific paper |
| title_sort | how to review a scientific paper |
| topic | peer review process ethical principles constructive criticism social evaluation |
| url | https://www.zastita-materijala.org/index.php/home/article/view/516 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aleksandardekanski howtoreviewascientificpaper AT ivanadrvenica howtoreviewascientificpaper AT olgicanedic howtoreviewascientificpaper |