Timeline for answer to Should I tell the editor I'm declining a review invitation because the authors are hostile about feedback? by Arno
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 7, 2022 at 14:06 | comment | added | terdon | If I read "conflict of interest" I would immediately assume that the reviewer is working in the same field and the results of the paper conflict with the reviewer's work. It wouldn't occur to me that the reviewer might have a problem with the author's behavior. I really feel conflict of interest will be misleading and should not be used. | |
| Apr 6, 2022 at 20:18 | comment | added | somebody | oh hmm... is this a situation in which business english is normally used? (if not, i guess maybe it's normal to assume that such terms are used in the business sense anyway... in which case fair enough) | |
| Apr 6, 2022 at 15:35 | comment | added | user3067860 | @somebody In American Business English (east coast flavor), "conflict of interest" doesn't fit here. The only way you could use "conflict of interest" here is if you were being funny/sarcastic or being disingenuous. (Fortunately for the OP, "Sorry, I can't review this one." is perfectly fine, no reason needed.) | |
| Apr 6, 2022 at 6:35 | comment | added | Servaes | @Arno Should I declare a conflict of interest to my employer because I'm lazy? The conflict is between my interest in receiving a paycheck for performing the tasks I'm contracted for, and my interest in slacking off. | |
| Apr 6, 2022 at 5:54 | comment | added | somebody | @Xerxes except that is what conflict of interest means: "An 'interest' is a commitment, obligation, duty or goal associated with a particular social role or practice.". they have their primary interest: a duty of giving an unbiased review of a paper; and a secondary interest: not receiving an angry response, and therefore not potentially having a bad day | |
| Apr 5, 2022 at 12:58 | comment | added | Xerxes | @Arno That's not what "conflict of interest" means; it is unwise to Humpty-Dumpty a word when you're intending to be clear in your communications. | |
| Apr 5, 2022 at 11:12 | comment | added | Nelson | Strictly speaking. "No." is a complete sentence. | |
| Apr 5, 2022 at 9:57 | comment | added | TimRias | @Deipatrous, if the authors are that hostile, one should definitely refuse to review their papers. | |
| Apr 5, 2022 at 9:11 | comment | added | Deipatrous | although this is meant to be anonymous, there is every chance that OP's identity will somehow become known or guessed by the hostile authors, who may exert their revenge on OP when it comes time for OP to submit the paper. This is how that works, boys and girls | |
| Apr 5, 2022 at 8:58 | comment | added | Arno | @henning They do! The conflict is between their interest in not receiving an angry response to their review and their interest in providing a rigorous critique of the submitted paper. If they have a bit of a vindictive streak, they also might feel a bit of an interest in really showing it to that jerk next time. | |
| Apr 5, 2022 at 8:00 | comment | added | henning no longer feeds AI | ...except OP doesn't have a conflict of interest. | |
| Apr 4, 2022 at 21:13 | comment | added | Patrick M | You don’t even need to decline because you believe you would be biased. What you’ve described might later give the appearance of bias. Avoiding the appearance of bias would be sufficient reason to decline this, although I agree with Arno that you should say the more neutral “conflict of interest.” | |
| Apr 4, 2022 at 10:15 | vote | accept | Snoop Dogg | ||
| Apr 4, 2022 at 9:42 | history | answered | Arno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |