
As a fallible process since its origins, peer review continues to be a widely debated aspect of modern science. Most scientists, if not all, are familiar with the infamous “reviewer #2” (R#2), synonymous with the “bad” reviewer, notorious for excessive or nonsensical demands. The internet is filled with jokes and sketches about R#2, and most readers have likely encountered a few. While it is not always R#2, this reviewer is often blamed and, interestingly, commonly perceived as male. Even the most diligent and competent reviewers have likely been labeled as R#2 at some point.
Veja também
Knowledge, Responsibility, and Artificial Intelligence: Reflections on Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity
It is not our aim, in this editorial, to offer a final definition of research…
COMPARTILHANDO REFLEXÕES
Desde o início da década de 1980 (no século passado!) tenho tido o privilégio de…
TERRAS RARAS: BREVE HISTÓRICO, IMPORTÂNCIA ESTRATÉGICA E PERSPECTIVAS PARA O BRASIL
As terras raras (TR) constituem um grupo de 17 elementos químicos com propriedades semelhantes, formado…
Editorial – Dez Anos Depois: Qual é o Legado do PROFQUI-RJ na Formação de Professores?
O diagnóstico dos problemas da educação brasileira é amplamente conhecido, permanece atual e urgente. Entre…

