- March 10th, 2025, 8:25 am
#472973
Hi Scott,
I hope this question does not offend you, because it is certainly not my intention!
On the OBC site, there are two things I've noticed, regarding this topic. They are:
1. When two editors, after having edited the same review, presented different ratings on certain categories, e.g. number of errors identified in the review, a process is kicked in to resolve the differences. The brief around this states something like "it's no big deal"; I don't remember the exact words. Actually, it is a big deal, because whoever "loses" the argument, is issued with a warning and after a certain number of warnings is banned from performing edits. In my view, this isn't very ethical. If it's no big deal, the two editors can use it as a learning experience and that's the end of it.
2. The same applies to PRQs. The brief around why reviewers are asked to submit PRQs is very friendly (I don't remember the exact words), with no hint of the consequences of making an error. I perceive this as not very ethical either. The review is rejected and the reviewer doesn't get paid, so the consequences are serious. Especially because something like sexual content is open to interpretation, despite the guidelines provided.
Kind regards
Alida