A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.
Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)
Contact: marvan@ut.edu
Blog mission & moderation policy
In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
What should I do when I am asked by a triple blind journal to review a paper that I myself submitted?
Obviously I will not agree to review it, but I'm wondering what is the best way to decline the request.
Usually when you decline a review, a paper's Editorial Manager site will ask for comments/recommendations for other referees.
I imagine this is something to note there?
My normal practice is to decline without giving any reason or any suggestions.
No suggestions as that would be simply wrong.
I do think you if you include reasons for declining, it should not be the real reason as the handling editor should not know that you are the author. (Years ago, once, I did say I was the author and the editor had to reassign the paper. Caused a long delay because the associate editor could no longer handle the paper and a new assoc. editor had to be found)
You can either decline without saying anything (many refereeing invitations receive such a response!), or say that you’re declining due to a conflict. No one will ask any more questions.
I read one journal saying something like “if you know the author, decline without explanation.” I imagine this applies to being the author. It looks plausible to me: explanation may give the editor some further clue of who the author might be, and risks compromising anonymity.
Just decline without saying anything (that’s the best option).
Years ago when this happened, I responded to the invitation noting that I was the 2nd author of the paper. It all went fine.
Leave a Reply to 2nd authorCancel reply