Most scientific journals, with or without an impact factor, obtain reviews on the contributions and for a fair process these are from two or more reviewers. Reviewing is an honorary task and entails time, patience, aptitude and love for the subject. Reviewing is a delicate art and besides the above prerequisites, a reviewer also has to offer suggestions and opinions in a better, understandable and diplomatic way. Some reviewers (both Indian and foreign) have a general way to comment and offer sweeping statements, e.g. the language is poor or grammar is bad. The native English reviewers' attitude would be condescending and they would mention that 'it is understandable that the authors are non-native English speakers and should seek help from a nativeEnglish speaker or some professional'. Such comments from native English speakers are (sometimes) acceptable, but may be unacceptable and even laughable if offered by non-native English reviewers including Indians. There would be instances when the English of such re-viewers itself leaves much to be desired. Some Indian reviewers have a brusque style and without offering any helpful suggestions tend to rip the manuscript with vague remarks. To cover their reviewing deficiency they tend to nitpick for no apparent reasons. For example, there would be a comment that the references are not according to the format even if this is not true. An irksome habit of certain Indian reviewers is to use rude language in their report, while there are others who keep the manuscriptfor months and later reject it without even reviewing. These attitudes are perhaps because the reviewer is either a competitor or a grudge-bearing colleague of the author.
展开▼
