Peer Review is useless, case 22527

This is the second time I’ve discussed open peer review reports of one of my articles, the previous time is here. This post is also a follow up of this one.

Jordan Anaya
Jan 17, 2018 · 2 min read

When looking at discussions of this paper I often see people emphasize that it isn’t peer-reviewed:

Image for post
Image for post

That’s funny, because it has been peer-reviewed. Even more funny, peer review didn’t change the article at all! Don’t believe me? The reviews are publicly available.

Our preprint (and submission) did contain some minor mistakes, and typically I would use the fact that the reviewers didn’t notice them to bemoan the quality of the reviews and peer review in general, but expecting the reviewers to notice the mistakes we had in the preprint is too much to ask. If the mistakes were easy to notice we would have noticed them, ha!

In his review of our article, Michael Schlussel opens:

I would like to congratulate the authors for their challenging initiative and thorough work.

Our paper is an achievement to be aspired to, so clearly this reviewer knows what he’s talking about, but no matter how shitty your paper is you can find reviewers that will love it. If someone only uses the peer-review status of a paper to judge its quality they are either not a scientist and don’t know better, or they are an idiot.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store