Referee and Reviewer Re: Journal reviews & publication

[Aiviet Nguyen <aiviet@cat.syr.edu>]

Hi Anh Tuan,
  I think you are talking about referees, not the reviewers.
Actually, you can say the referee reviews an article, but they are 
different. A review article is just " Ddie^?m ba'o". Referee= " Duye^.t 
ba`i".
  In principle, editors have the final word, but in practice of several 
journal, it is not likely, as editors cannnot cover all the narrow fields.
If the referees don't recommend the publication, the author can appeal and
the editors can decide to choose new referees or refuse the appeal.
  The reviewer ( Math.Rev.) can choose the fields ( not just one or few)
to review and not necesarily just his own topics. It is for him to decide 
to choose those fields which are close enough to his field.
  In the review form, he has the option to decide whether he want to 
review the paper at all or recommend the paper to be reviewed on the 
Math.Rev. at all. If not, he can give an explanantion and if the second 
reviewer agrees with him the paper won't be reviewed.
  So Anh TienZung has not answered to my question about the choice of 
Math.Rev. I am sure that there are thousand reviewers available. The choice
anh Zung mentioned is relevant only for referees. I still think that MR 
made a wrong choice when choosing people from the same place.That is not 
OBJECTIVE in either good or bad direction.

  To my perception, the intention of a MR review is just review the content
as objective as possible, as the reviewed author does not have the chance
to reply. That is why I think the review of Mr.Hung is more proper for an 
explanation when not recommending the article for a review.
 
Cheers
Aiviet

PS: 8USD of reviewer honorium is never paid in cash. Actually , review is 
a voluntary work.That money can be used to buy proceedings...only.

On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Tuan V Nguyen wrote:

> 	Not always. The reviewers' comments are taken into 
> account in the decision for publication, but the editor 
> always has the final word. I have several experience where 
> three reviewers, each gives different opinions, for 
> example, one is for; one is against; and still one is 
> neutral, then the editor will have the final say. These 
> days, editors are very powerful; they can refuse to publish 
> a paper, even if reviewers have high regard for it. Still, 
> there are journals which do not have peer review process, 
> and the editor(s) is/are the king in these cases. This sort 
> of things happen all the time. 
> 
> 	Publication is a "fighting" business nowadays. 
> Sometimes, you have to pick up the phone and ring the 
> editors and complain about poor treatment (if you believe 
> so). One of my colleagues here remarks that publication can 
> be a random event. Indeed, I remember years ago, a paper 
> was refused for publication in a curious, mickey-mouse 
> journal, but it finally landed in Nature!!!
> 
> 
> 	Tuan
> 
> 
>