
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
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…
The SBQ Editorial Training Program: Building the Next Generation of Scientific Editors
Scientific communication has always been an important tool for scientists to engage in dialogue, initially…
Desconto Especial: Taxas de Publicação e 49a RASBQ
Condições especiais Descontos nas taxas de publicação nas revistas:Journal of the Brazilian Chemical Society, Química…
DIVULGAR, CONECTAR E FORTALECER A QUÍMICA NACIONAL: O PAPEL DA QUÍMICA NOVA
A Química Nova é uma revista de acesso aberto que acompanha e fortalece a ciência…

