Referee report of The Great Escape
adeuxywx
referee_report_requirements.pptReferee Reports
What is the purpose of a referee report?
What is the structure of a referee report?
How can I write a good referee report?
Example
*
Purpose
Referee reports are the lifeblood of scholarship. They are supposed to be objective assessments of the originality, scientific soundness, and conclusions of the work that is written.
They are supposed to be critical and raise questions and also provide suggestions for improvement.
*
Purpose
This is not always the case. Many referee reports are useless. Some will discuss everything that should have been done rather than assessing whether what was done was actually done well.
They are supposed to be about the manuscript as written, not the manuscript you wished that they wrote.
*
Structure
Referee Reports have a basic structure
Brief synopisis
Overall assessment
Areas of concern/issues to address/lingering questions
Smaller points
*
Brief Synopsis
The very first thing a referee report needs to do is to tell the editor whether or not you understand the paper at a basic level. The synopsis at the beginning of the referee report is quite important.
This is usually a paragraph (4-6 sentences or so) and very rarely more than that.
*
Brief Synopsis
If your synopsis is a re-hash of the abstract of the paper you are on the way to a very poor grade for the referee report.
It must be in your own words and describe the paper as you would describe it to me, not as the author has described it to you.
*
Overall Assessment
The overall assessment is usually a paragraph or two which notes how you view the paper overall. It addresses some broad areas that any paper should be concerned about.
*
Overall Assessment
Was the paper well written?
Was the paper original?
Was the paper well motivated?
Did the paper make clear what it was about, what question it was asking, how it was going to answer it, tell you what the answer was, and provide some sort of context for what it found?
*
Originality
Does this paper make a contribution to the body of scientific literature, full stop.
Does it tell us something (anything) that we did not know before?
If not, it certainly is not publishable.
(Did you learn anything?)
*
Motivation
Is this paper answering a question that anybody seems to care about (other than the author)? Is there a literature that this paper speaks to? Does it establish something that others would use and pay attention to?
The author needs to tell you this, but you are also expected to use your own judgement.
*
Clarity
Does the paper actually do what it said it would do?
Could you follow what the author was doing?
Did they tell you why they were doing what they were doing in order to answer the question they are asking?
*
Areas/Issues
This is the heart of the referee report and should be roughly 75% of the referee report.
This is where you get to show what you know, what you are confused about, and what you would like to see the author do to establish their case better than what they have.
*
Areas/Issues
One of the first issues is usually theory.
Do the authors use a theory that is appropriate?
If no theory, why not? Is this just an empirical exercise?
*
Areas/Issues
Does the theory make sense?
(Remember Solow and Fogel)
Is the theory appropriate for the issue at hand?
*
Areas/Issues
The second area would be the history.
Does this paper get the history right? (Solow)
Do they cite historians? Is the historical setting described in enough detail that it tells you that the author knows what they are talking about?
*
Areas/Issues
This is where you get to say things like…
“I’m confused by the way that they describe the Depression. I was taught that consumption declines preceded…”
Here, you need to show that you have done readings outside of class that inform topic of the report.
*
Areas/Issues
The largest part of a report will be in showing that you know the literature that the author(s) is trying to contribute to. And you should show that you know it well.
*
Areas/Issues
Data and methodology will be a large part of any report.
Is the data appropriate to answer the question?
Is this a direct or indirect method?
If direct, can the data be trusted?
If indirect, can the data be trusted?
*
Areas/Issues
Is the method used with the data described in sufficient detail?
Is the model for the data manipulation plain?
Are the proxies used appropriate?
If you don’t understand, say so, that’s valuable in a referee report.
*
Areas/Issues
It is totally appropriate to get involved with confusion and to be clear about why you were confused. That is a fault of the author.
*
Smaller Issues
Misspellings
Typos
Things that were just annoying to you.
Should not be a large part of a report.
*
