[Corpora-List] corpora-list: publishing lists of accepted and rejected papers

[Leon Derczynski]

Hi,

You make an interesting comment about the participation of PhD
students in the discussion. As a PhD student, I haven't had enough
particularly positive or negative experiences of various reviewing
methods to make a worthwhile contribution to the discussion, but
fully-open review certainly has some strong advantages, as does
(conversely) the ability to leave anonymous reviews of work from
prominent authors.

So far, though, the deficiencies in peer-review from a student's
perspective - as mentioned frequently before - is the ability to
anonymously leave a useless comment ("vague in places" -? does this
discuss the paper or the review!), and also the ability of a single 1
to scupper a paper in a particular venue. At this stage in an academic
career, both of these are generally outweighed by the huge amounts of
friendly and helpful guidance provided by reviewers of student papers,
and even from non-student venues.

Editors should easily be able to prune occurrences of the first
(hopefully with quite friendly measures such as EMNLP's reviewing
awards). The second could be made less of an issue with a wide choice
of similar-level publication venues. If there's a malicious reviewer
for your topic on the board for Prestigious Journal A, being able to
submit to Prestigious Journal B will serve to both get one's work
reviewed fairly and maybe even perhaps appropriately reduce the
quality/volume of work published in A.

All the best,


Leon

On 17 October 2011 08:32, Anne Schumann <anne.schumann at tilde.lv> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> being both a woman and a young researcher, too^^, I also would like to comment on Ramesh's proposal. I am not sure that there are not more subtle ways for creating transparency (many were proposed in the LREC discussion). However, mystifying publication politics without acknowledging that rejection, in science as in any other area of life, happens to everybody, may actually create the illusion that "everybody" is always successful and thus enhance pressure on researchers (whatever gender and age they may have). I personally feel that science is quite a competitive area and there's no shame in publicly announcing results (as is common practice in sports or music competitions). And why should there be no possibility of improvement for those who failed to meet the standards in their first attempt?
> However, other people may still think differently and be afraid of public mention. To give an example, at least one of my fellow students said she was too afraid to post to this list. And there are, in general, not many PhD students participating in discussions here. This speaks in favour of maintaining privacy.
>
> Best,
> Anne-Kathrin Schumann
> PhD Student
> University of Vienna
> Tilde
>
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
> Corpora mailing list
> Corpora at uib.no
> http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
>



-- 
Leon R A Derczynski
NLP Research Group

Department of Computer Science
University of Sheffield
Regent Court, 211 Portobello
Sheffield S1 4DP, UK

+44 114 22 21931
http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~leon/

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora