Mixing
![At will employee, put my two weeks in [closed]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjbpfN9tAutmK93bJRC3ZoROZzi2TJDms5n8_qJuhgE0a9b52OOHayv3NGT8igAdFL7byXNst-_1DZK5SjrIJ28_6RQPUpBROqMs5s6jo-ZsjX8kjDwfxJufIitH3TaQRXWaGSQKRQib-f/s72-c/1.jpg)
Is it okay to mention we're citing an article only because a reviewer told us to?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
In a recent review, one reviewer said we must rework the paper in light of two other papers. One paper was a highly valuable suggestion, and we've enthusiastically taken it on board. However, the second paper seems to be an ultra-specific paper (one example among thousands) and not applicable to our work.
I'm thinking of writing something like:
There are many methods for XYZ (and an anonymous reviewer of this paper seemed fond of QRST [26]), and a survey was given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC for our specific problem.
(Here, I leave off "...since QRST does not actually apply to our problem".)
In this example, we (fairly politely) highlight that we're citing [26] at the reviewer's request. But I'm a bit worried it would be perceived as a passive-aggressive slight.
Question: Is it okay to mention we're citing an article only because a reviewer told us to?
I'm also considering two alternatives:
Alternative 1:
There are many methods for XYZ, such as QRST [26], LMNOP [4], and QRSTUV [5]; a survey is given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC.
But this seems like I'm adding even more virtually irrelevant citations.
Alternative 2:
Acknowledgment
A helpful anonymous reviewer suggested citing [26].
But while accurate, it might be considered provocative (and rude) and get the paper rejected.
This question is related to: How to deal with an unreasonable reviewer asking to cite irrelevant articles? But in our case, the reviewer is not being unreasonable, maybe just fond of this particular paper. And it's just one additional citation that's being requested.
citations peer-review
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
In a recent review, one reviewer said we must rework the paper in light of two other papers. One paper was a highly valuable suggestion, and we've enthusiastically taken it on board. However, the second paper seems to be an ultra-specific paper (one example among thousands) and not applicable to our work.
I'm thinking of writing something like:
There are many methods for XYZ (and an anonymous reviewer of this paper seemed fond of QRST [26]), and a survey was given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC for our specific problem.
(Here, I leave off "...since QRST does not actually apply to our problem".)
In this example, we (fairly politely) highlight that we're citing [26] at the reviewer's request. But I'm a bit worried it would be perceived as a passive-aggressive slight.
Question: Is it okay to mention we're citing an article only because a reviewer told us to?
I'm also considering two alternatives:
Alternative 1:
There are many methods for XYZ, such as QRST [26], LMNOP [4], and QRSTUV [5]; a survey is given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC.
But this seems like I'm adding even more virtually irrelevant citations.
Alternative 2:
Acknowledgment
A helpful anonymous reviewer suggested citing [26].
But while accurate, it might be considered provocative (and rude) and get the paper rejected.
This question is related to: How to deal with an unreasonable reviewer asking to cite irrelevant articles? But in our case, the reviewer is not being unreasonable, maybe just fond of this particular paper. And it's just one additional citation that's being requested.
citations peer-review
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
In a recent review, one reviewer said we must rework the paper in light of two other papers. One paper was a highly valuable suggestion, and we've enthusiastically taken it on board. However, the second paper seems to be an ultra-specific paper (one example among thousands) and not applicable to our work.
I'm thinking of writing something like:
There are many methods for XYZ (and an anonymous reviewer of this paper seemed fond of QRST [26]), and a survey was given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC for our specific problem.
(Here, I leave off "...since QRST does not actually apply to our problem".)
In this example, we (fairly politely) highlight that we're citing [26] at the reviewer's request. But I'm a bit worried it would be perceived as a passive-aggressive slight.
Question: Is it okay to mention we're citing an article only because a reviewer told us to?
I'm also considering two alternatives:
Alternative 1:
There are many methods for XYZ, such as QRST [26], LMNOP [4], and QRSTUV [5]; a survey is given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC.
But this seems like I'm adding even more virtually irrelevant citations.
Alternative 2:
Acknowledgment
A helpful anonymous reviewer suggested citing [26].
But while accurate, it might be considered provocative (and rude) and get the paper rejected.
This question is related to: How to deal with an unreasonable reviewer asking to cite irrelevant articles? But in our case, the reviewer is not being unreasonable, maybe just fond of this particular paper. And it's just one additional citation that's being requested.
citations peer-review
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
In a recent review, one reviewer said we must rework the paper in light of two other papers. One paper was a highly valuable suggestion, and we've enthusiastically taken it on board. However, the second paper seems to be an ultra-specific paper (one example among thousands) and not applicable to our work.
I'm thinking of writing something like:
There are many methods for XYZ (and an anonymous reviewer of this paper seemed fond of QRST [26]), and a survey was given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC for our specific problem.
(Here, I leave off "...since QRST does not actually apply to our problem".)
In this example, we (fairly politely) highlight that we're citing [26] at the reviewer's request. But I'm a bit worried it would be perceived as a passive-aggressive slight.
Question: Is it okay to mention we're citing an article only because a reviewer told us to?
I'm also considering two alternatives:
Alternative 1:
There are many methods for XYZ, such as QRST [26], LMNOP [4], and QRSTUV [5]; a survey is given in [15]. In this paper, we take the approach ABC.
But this seems like I'm adding even more virtually irrelevant citations.
Alternative 2:
Acknowledgment
A helpful anonymous reviewer suggested citing [26].
But while accurate, it might be considered provocative (and rude) and get the paper rejected.
This question is related to: How to deal with an unreasonable reviewer asking to cite irrelevant articles? But in our case, the reviewer is not being unreasonable, maybe just fond of this particular paper. And it's just one additional citation that's being requested.
citations peer-review
citations peer-review
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
asked 35 mins ago
Rebecca J. Stones
4,04712031
4,04712031
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
As it turns out, not every comment or suggestion forwarded by a reviewer needs to be necessarily accommodated in your manuscript. Hence, as you seem to have a convincing arguement against citing the suggested paper in your manuscript, in your rebuttal letter state that you have considered the suggested comment but you didn't find that paper to merit citation in your manuscript (however, compose your argument politely thanking the reviewer for the suggestion).
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
There is no reason or regulation that you have to include the citation at all in a case like this. The reviewer's comments are just that: comments. The editor may take them as requirements or not, but the paper is still yours and you should use your judgement about what to include.
But to avoid problems that may arise with the editor, include your reasons in a note to him/her. We didn't include x because y. The editor may send it back, but I doubt it. The editor may also send it out for additional review but likely to a different set of reviewers. Even if it is reviewed again by the same person, as long as they don't have a particular motive for the suggestion, they should evaluate your paper as a whole. But your paper contains nothing provocative if you just omit the citation.
Let the editor work for you and explain why you haven't taken a particular suggestion among many that you did find helpful.
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Expanding on my comment (now deleted): I sense a tension between two motivations, which seem implicit in your question and approach:
- You want to accommodate the request, although it is perhaps
unreasonable, to make sure your paper gets published. - You want to include only what's relevant and reasonable, so as not to compromise the paper's quality for the sake of "review politics".
You propose to resolve the tension by including the requested citation but distancing yourself from it at the same time. However, this comes across as either rude and petty or as perfunctory. Chances are, this won't get the job done: The reviewer may be less inclined to recommend acceptance of your paper if your tone is rude or his request is served perfunctorily; and you don't really stand your ground either.
My suggestion would be to treat the superfluous reference as a mere suggestion and to not include it. I would point out the reasons in the accompanying letter to the editor, in which you also detail the other changes you made to the draft. This helps both of your goals while acting upfront: It maintains your integrity and the quality of the paper, but it also improves your chance of acceptance, since in the last instance, the editor makes the decision, and your argument for not including the reference sounds persuasive.
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
As it turns out, not every comment or suggestion forwarded by a reviewer needs to be necessarily accommodated in your manuscript. Hence, as you seem to have a convincing arguement against citing the suggested paper in your manuscript, in your rebuttal letter state that you have considered the suggested comment but you didn't find that paper to merit citation in your manuscript (however, compose your argument politely thanking the reviewer for the suggestion).
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
As it turns out, not every comment or suggestion forwarded by a reviewer needs to be necessarily accommodated in your manuscript. Hence, as you seem to have a convincing arguement against citing the suggested paper in your manuscript, in your rebuttal letter state that you have considered the suggested comment but you didn't find that paper to merit citation in your manuscript (however, compose your argument politely thanking the reviewer for the suggestion).
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
up vote
5
down vote
As it turns out, not every comment or suggestion forwarded by a reviewer needs to be necessarily accommodated in your manuscript. Hence, as you seem to have a convincing arguement against citing the suggested paper in your manuscript, in your rebuttal letter state that you have considered the suggested comment but you didn't find that paper to merit citation in your manuscript (however, compose your argument politely thanking the reviewer for the suggestion).
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
As it turns out, not every comment or suggestion forwarded by a reviewer needs to be necessarily accommodated in your manuscript. Hence, as you seem to have a convincing arguement against citing the suggested paper in your manuscript, in your rebuttal letter state that you have considered the suggested comment but you didn't find that paper to merit citation in your manuscript (however, compose your argument politely thanking the reviewer for the suggestion).
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
answered 15 mins ago
Ayalew A.
32615
32615
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
There is no reason or regulation that you have to include the citation at all in a case like this. The reviewer's comments are just that: comments. The editor may take them as requirements or not, but the paper is still yours and you should use your judgement about what to include.
But to avoid problems that may arise with the editor, include your reasons in a note to him/her. We didn't include x because y. The editor may send it back, but I doubt it. The editor may also send it out for additional review but likely to a different set of reviewers. Even if it is reviewed again by the same person, as long as they don't have a particular motive for the suggestion, they should evaluate your paper as a whole. But your paper contains nothing provocative if you just omit the citation.
Let the editor work for you and explain why you haven't taken a particular suggestion among many that you did find helpful.
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
There is no reason or regulation that you have to include the citation at all in a case like this. The reviewer's comments are just that: comments. The editor may take them as requirements or not, but the paper is still yours and you should use your judgement about what to include.
But to avoid problems that may arise with the editor, include your reasons in a note to him/her. We didn't include x because y. The editor may send it back, but I doubt it. The editor may also send it out for additional review but likely to a different set of reviewers. Even if it is reviewed again by the same person, as long as they don't have a particular motive for the suggestion, they should evaluate your paper as a whole. But your paper contains nothing provocative if you just omit the citation.
Let the editor work for you and explain why you haven't taken a particular suggestion among many that you did find helpful.
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
There is no reason or regulation that you have to include the citation at all in a case like this. The reviewer's comments are just that: comments. The editor may take them as requirements or not, but the paper is still yours and you should use your judgement about what to include.
But to avoid problems that may arise with the editor, include your reasons in a note to him/her. We didn't include x because y. The editor may send it back, but I doubt it. The editor may also send it out for additional review but likely to a different set of reviewers. Even if it is reviewed again by the same person, as long as they don't have a particular motive for the suggestion, they should evaluate your paper as a whole. But your paper contains nothing provocative if you just omit the citation.
Let the editor work for you and explain why you haven't taken a particular suggestion among many that you did find helpful.
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
There is no reason or regulation that you have to include the citation at all in a case like this. The reviewer's comments are just that: comments. The editor may take them as requirements or not, but the paper is still yours and you should use your judgement about what to include.
But to avoid problems that may arise with the editor, include your reasons in a note to him/her. We didn't include x because y. The editor may send it back, but I doubt it. The editor may also send it out for additional review but likely to a different set of reviewers. Even if it is reviewed again by the same person, as long as they don't have a particular motive for the suggestion, they should evaluate your paper as a whole. But your paper contains nothing provocative if you just omit the citation.
Let the editor work for you and explain why you haven't taken a particular suggestion among many that you did find helpful.
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
answered 18 mins ago
Buffy
17.2k55194
17.2k55194
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Expanding on my comment (now deleted): I sense a tension between two motivations, which seem implicit in your question and approach:
- You want to accommodate the request, although it is perhaps
unreasonable, to make sure your paper gets published. - You want to include only what's relevant and reasonable, so as not to compromise the paper's quality for the sake of "review politics".
You propose to resolve the tension by including the requested citation but distancing yourself from it at the same time. However, this comes across as either rude and petty or as perfunctory. Chances are, this won't get the job done: The reviewer may be less inclined to recommend acceptance of your paper if your tone is rude or his request is served perfunctorily; and you don't really stand your ground either.
My suggestion would be to treat the superfluous reference as a mere suggestion and to not include it. I would point out the reasons in the accompanying letter to the editor, in which you also detail the other changes you made to the draft. This helps both of your goals while acting upfront: It maintains your integrity and the quality of the paper, but it also improves your chance of acceptance, since in the last instance, the editor makes the decision, and your argument for not including the reference sounds persuasive.
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Expanding on my comment (now deleted): I sense a tension between two motivations, which seem implicit in your question and approach:
- You want to accommodate the request, although it is perhaps
unreasonable, to make sure your paper gets published. - You want to include only what's relevant and reasonable, so as not to compromise the paper's quality for the sake of "review politics".
You propose to resolve the tension by including the requested citation but distancing yourself from it at the same time. However, this comes across as either rude and petty or as perfunctory. Chances are, this won't get the job done: The reviewer may be less inclined to recommend acceptance of your paper if your tone is rude or his request is served perfunctorily; and you don't really stand your ground either.
My suggestion would be to treat the superfluous reference as a mere suggestion and to not include it. I would point out the reasons in the accompanying letter to the editor, in which you also detail the other changes you made to the draft. This helps both of your goals while acting upfront: It maintains your integrity and the quality of the paper, but it also improves your chance of acceptance, since in the last instance, the editor makes the decision, and your argument for not including the reference sounds persuasive.
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Expanding on my comment (now deleted): I sense a tension between two motivations, which seem implicit in your question and approach:
- You want to accommodate the request, although it is perhaps
unreasonable, to make sure your paper gets published. - You want to include only what's relevant and reasonable, so as not to compromise the paper's quality for the sake of "review politics".
You propose to resolve the tension by including the requested citation but distancing yourself from it at the same time. However, this comes across as either rude and petty or as perfunctory. Chances are, this won't get the job done: The reviewer may be less inclined to recommend acceptance of your paper if your tone is rude or his request is served perfunctorily; and you don't really stand your ground either.
My suggestion would be to treat the superfluous reference as a mere suggestion and to not include it. I would point out the reasons in the accompanying letter to the editor, in which you also detail the other changes you made to the draft. This helps both of your goals while acting upfront: It maintains your integrity and the quality of the paper, but it also improves your chance of acceptance, since in the last instance, the editor makes the decision, and your argument for not including the reference sounds persuasive.
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
Expanding on my comment (now deleted): I sense a tension between two motivations, which seem implicit in your question and approach:
- You want to accommodate the request, although it is perhaps
unreasonable, to make sure your paper gets published. - You want to include only what's relevant and reasonable, so as not to compromise the paper's quality for the sake of "review politics".
You propose to resolve the tension by including the requested citation but distancing yourself from it at the same time. However, this comes across as either rude and petty or as perfunctory. Chances are, this won't get the job done: The reviewer may be less inclined to recommend acceptance of your paper if your tone is rude or his request is served perfunctorily; and you don't really stand your ground either.
My suggestion would be to treat the superfluous reference as a mere suggestion and to not include it. I would point out the reasons in the accompanying letter to the editor, in which you also detail the other changes you made to the draft. This helps both of your goals while acting upfront: It maintains your integrity and the quality of the paper, but it also improves your chance of acceptance, since in the last instance, the editor makes the decision, and your argument for not including the reference sounds persuasive.
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
answered 15 mins ago
henning
15.6k45583
15.6k45583
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f117054%2fis-it-okay-to-mention-were-citing-an-article-only-because-a-reviewer-told-us-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
