Comments on: Why the Peer Review Process Works Even When It Doesn’t

By: The Writing Process | What can you do with anthropology?

The Writing Process | What can you do with anthropology? — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 01:31:56 +0000

[…] /2015/02/23/why-the-peer-review-process-works-even-when-it-doesnt/ […]

By: Does Constructive Criticism Help? | What can you do with anthropology?

Does Constructive Criticism Help? | What can you do with anthropology? — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 13:20:36 +0000

[…] to do so, but he did eventually end up publishing it as a book, and he also wrote the article “Why The Peer Review Process Works Even When It Doesn’t” in order to illustrate his experience and what he learned from his […]

By: Friday Varia and Quick Hits | The Archaeology of the Mediterranean World

Friday Varia and Quick Hits | The Archaeology of the Mediterranean World — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:37:08 +0000

[…] Why the peer review process works, even if it doesn’t. […]

By: Getting Published | What can you do with anthropology?

Getting Published | What can you do with anthropology? — Tue, 03 Mar 2015 00:28:53 +0000

[…] /2015/02/23/why-the-peer-review-process-works-even-when-it-doesnt/#more-16378 […]

By: nakassis

nakassis — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 06:40:33 +0000

I’m an American archaeologist who has worked in Greece for two decades. I was a regular member at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens and am on two of its committees. I know of no rule that it’s bad form to criticize past scholars like Robinson. In fact, I read the reviews of your book with great interest, although not unfortunately surprise, and I look forward to reading the book. It’s also not true that you must spend a year at the School to work in Greece; there are plenty of people who haven’t. The American School can be conservative, in good and bad ways, but (1) I’m not sure that Dyson is much of an expert on it as I see no evidence that he’s spent much time there, (2) things are much different now than they were even 10 years ago, and (3) there’s a big difference between the reputation that an institution may have and the political orientations of its constituent members, assuming that these were your reviewers. I suspect that part of the problem (not to deny your point that your anonymous reviewers, whoever they were, were made uncomfortable by the manuscript) is that most journals of Classical archaeology don’t publish much about the discipline’s history.

By: charlesmenzies

charlesmenzies — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:48:37 +0000

A nicely stated piece. It actually led me to order the book! I’ve had a similar experience with an article that eventually saw the light of day. While it did not address a scandal such as yours, it did cause reviewers a sense of discomfort. Normally I just make the changes asked for by reviewers. But in this case I held my ground to the principle and tone of the paper while addressing the various criticisms. I now have five full sets of reviewers comments (one for each of the submission attempts) plus the very considered comments by the editors that so very kindly pointed out the errors of my ways 🙂 The paper is now in print and for those interested in seeing what so inflamed an anthropological audience do check it out here:https://www.academia.edu/6241693/Standing_on_the_Shore_with_Sabaan

By: Announcing the Spring 2015 Writers’ Workshop Series | Savage Minds

Announcing the Spring 2015 Writers’ Workshop Series | Savage Minds — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:00:28 +0000

[…] February 23—Alan Kaiser, “Why the Peer Review Process Works Even When It Doesn’t”… […]