Fundamentally, peer review is critical to the proper functioning of science, and yet there can be surprising variations in the subtle variations of what editors are looking for and how they select reviewers and make decisions.
Today at the Publications Workshop of the Annual Meeting, several AMS journal editors will gather in a panel (Room 604, 12:15 PM) to answer your questions about the how’s and why’s of the peer review process.
The editors exploring their common views and differences are: Tony Broccoli, of the Journal of Climate; Walt Robinson, of the Journal of Atmospheric Sciences; Carolyn Reynolds and Yvette Richardson of Monthly Weather Review; and Jeff Rosenfeld, of BAMS.
Snacks will be provided, and there will be discount coupons of MWR Chief Editor Dave Schultz’s book, Eloquent Science: A Practical Guide to Becoming a Better Writer, Speaker, & Atmospheric Scientist for those attending. The book can be purchased at the Resource Center.
To get a head start on some of themes the panel will address, the AMS recorded two interviews–one with Schultz and Weather, Climate, and Society Chief Editor Amanda Lynch–about the role of peer review for two contrasting journals:
Interview with David Schultz:
Interview with Amanda Lynch: