Go to the profile of Yasin Ghulam
Yasin Ghulam about 1 year ago

Obviously, the every author get updated and new breakthrough in the advancement of currently going on progress in the relevant as well in broad spectrum of his expertise and field.

Go to the profile of Muhammad Naeem Nizam
Muhammad Naeem Nizam about 1 year ago

in a process of peer review, every reviewer gets a lot of knowledge and new ideas for own interest.

Go to the profile of Dr. Felix Bongomin
Dr. Felix Bongomin 12 months ago

I have the same feeling.

Go to the profile of Aydin ashrafi
Aydin ashrafi about 1 year ago

Peer reveiw is good for both author and reviewer becuase they will be familiar with other sight

Go to the profile of Israel Borokini
Israel Borokini about 1 year ago

Peer review process is absolutely important, as long as the methodology and scientific process are thoroughly addressed, rather than mere grammatical edits

Go to the profile of Sunil Kumar
Sunil Kumar about 1 year ago

Very nicely explained by  Dr George Booth 

Go to the profile of Thulisile  P. Jaca
Thulisile P. Jaca about 1 year ago

Well explained Dr George Booth, i liked that last part that authors shouldn't be expecting to be praised for their work but rather have a mind set of how their work can be improved.

Go to the profile of THIAGARAJAN
THIAGARAJAN 12 months ago

really awesome 

Go to the profile of THIAGARAJAN
THIAGARAJAN 12 months ago



exactly! when i did my first publication i went through all these feelings. its not questioning ones knowledge or sincerity in the work, but to see our work from a different perspective. after all, not all who read our article will think the same way .hence knowing from others point of view before publication is very important especially to make the reader stay on our topic.

Go to the profile of Srinivasan Jayaraman
Srinivasan Jayaraman 10 months ago

valid points addressed...

Go to the profile of Naoko Sato
Naoko Sato 10 months ago

Go to the profile of SEEMA PARTE
SEEMA PARTE 10 months ago

i think reviewing requires a fine balance of knowledge and scrutiny and poise in the form of the decision you submit for a manuscript. It is essential to develop required key skills since paper publication puts at stake so much more than science-at a personal level and career point of view and the amount of time and resources utilized in the study

Go to the profile of Tadesse Bekele Tafesse
Tadesse Bekele Tafesse 6 months ago

I agree with the peer review process as it improves the quality of the manuscript

Go to the profile of Gabriela Perez Tort
Gabriela Perez Tort 6 months ago

I think as Dr Booth says,  that when our manuscript is being reviewed, we should not consider it a battle against the reviewer but on the contrary a colaborative work in order to produce a better and more clear paper.

Go to the profile of Kamuyu Mwai
Kamuyu Mwai 3 months ago

Peer reviewing also deepens scope & elongates perception of the reviewer in the subject he/she is reviewing. There is always something new to learn.

Go to the profile of Raghed ibrahim esmaeel

Thanks for .Dr George about this video. Yes, of course, more quality work of the paper, more interesting focus on the manuscript of the article.

Go to the profile of Rabiu Aliyu
Rabiu Aliyu about 1 month ago

I definitely share the same feelings and sentiments with Dr. Booth. Being in the academia, albeit in a developing country with poor funding and obsolete facilities, i too had published quite a number of papers and I benefited from the suggestions of the reviewers and at the end the quality of the papers got a boost.But occasionally I was annoyed or felt unduly " cheated" when my manuscript was rejected only to find a similar manuscript inferior in content and poorer in language from Asia for example, published by the same journal (not by Nature group of journals any way) .