Another note on peer review

[Geoff Hart <geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>]

     Picture this: You're sitting happily in your office, playing Windows
     Solitaire (the OS's best feature, as it happens) or tapping away at
     the latest techwhirler digest, when suddenly one of your former
     friends knocks on the door. "Got time for a quick peer review?" Noting
     with alarm that the friend's hands are out of sight, you courageously
     mumble "Umm, well..." Taking this as encouragement, the friend
     deposits 600 pages of manual on your desk. "You want this when?" you
     mutter, eyes glazing. "How about tomorrow?"

     Hyperbole aside, this scenario makes one point very clear. NEVER give
     a peer reviewer a large volume of material on short notice; if you're
     lucky, they'll read it, but don't expect any detailed comments. There
     are two good-as-gold alternatives that _always_ work better:

     1. Send chapters for review as soon as they're ready. (See my previuos
     posting re. iterative reviews for details.)

     2. If the first option isn't possible: Break the monstrosity up into
     digestible chunks, and send each chunk to someone who's truly expert
     in that particular chunk, not to whoever happens to be too slow-witted
     to say "no" before you can escape out the door. Not only do you reduce
     that reviewer's work load, decreasing the likelihood of ending up with
     the aforementioned "former friend", you also increase the likelihood
     of a detailed review.

     As for bribing reviewers with food... Hear, Hear! Remember the Hart
     family motto, constructed with the invaluable aid of Richard
     Mateosian, Julie Barker and Renee Cornelison: "Tantus cibus, scantus
     cron!" (So much food, so little time.) Eating on the job might just be
     one way to keep up, despite the downside of sticky keyboards...

     --Geoff Hart    #8^{)}  <---- gurgle
     geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca

     Disclaimer: If I didn't commit it in print in one of
     our reports, it don't represent FERIC's opinion.