The Hidden Dangers of Peer Review

For Nyssa Silbiger, a marine biologist at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, the harsh critique she received in 2014 for her first paper still painlessly lingers. "I’ve so far avoided using the phrases ‘lipstick on a pig’ and ‘bullshit baffles brains,’" wrote reviewer three, leaving Silbiger questioning her worth in science. As a young researcher, such brutal criticism can be a devastating blow, impacting self-esteem and future career prospects.

A Widespread Issue

Unfortunately, Silbiger is not alone. Research shows that peer review often crosses the line into unprofessionalism, with nearly 58% of surveyed scientists admitting to encountering inappropriate comments. This trend particularly impacts women, non-binary scientists, and people of color, damaging their confidence and hampering career growth.

Turning the Tide

Fortunately, awareness is rising, and steps are being taken to combat this issue. Journals and scientific organizations are beginning to implement measures to curb bullying during peer review. Emma Dunne, a palaeobiologist from Germany, notes, "Progress is being made, albeit slowly," and believes in a future where peer reviews become more constructive.

Why the Rudeness?

The question remains: why do some peer reviews contain such negativity? Many reviewers believe harsh comments can prevent poor research from being published, while others let personal biases or competition cloud their judgment. For example, some reviewers might take aim at younger authors or those from underrepresented backgrounds, leading to unprofessional and damaging remarks.

Navigating Bad Reviews

To minimize the risk of receiving toxic feedback, researchers should carefully select journals that align with their values. Double-anonymous peer review, where both author and reviewer identities are hidden, has been shown to reduce bias and promote fairness. However, many scientists still find that anonymity breeds less accountability.

Constructive Criticism vs. Personal Attacks

Authors should ask themselves if the feedback helps improve their work or simply chips away at their confidence. Mirvat Alasnag, an interventional cardiologist, encourages researchers to sift through harsh feedback for the valuable insights that can enhance their papers.

Taking Action Against Bullies

When faced with egregious comments, Silbiger recommends addressing them directly. Authors should thank reviewers for valid critiques, but also highlight any unethical remarks and request their removal. In her own experience, Silbiger's PhD supervisor's intervention ultimately led to her paper's acceptance, demonstrating the importance of having advocates in academic settings.

Resilience in Research

In the often-turbulent world of academia, being prepared for unprofessional peer reviews can make a significant difference. Researchers should strive for resilience, focusing on constructive feedback while advocating against toxic behaviors in their field. Together, they can foster a more supportive and equitable environment for all.