My favorite part of any Chemical & Engineering News is the one-page column “Newscripts” that waits at the end of the issue, like a dessert after supper. It collects two or three short pieces related to science and tends to have an irreverent flavor. Take the January 10, 2011, column for example, with the subtitle “Fondue. Fruit Flies. Frustration and Felicity.” The three pieces then focused on a research group from a digestive diseases center investigating the best beverage to drink with cheese fondue, the use of flies to screen new sweetening ingredients, and a selection of 2010 referee quotes from the journal Environmental Microbiology.

It was this last piece that spurred this post. Having been deep in the review process for the Journal of Chemical Education this past decade, both from the point of view of a manuscript reviewer and as an associate editor reading comments returned by reviewers to make decisions about manuscripts, many these quotes went straight to my heart (and my funny bone). “Newscripts” highlighted five of the referee quotes, including “The lack of negative controls … results in the authors being lost in the funhouse. Unfortunately, I do not think they even realize this.” The much larger collection is available online. Some of my other favorites that highlight some of the ups and downs of the review process:

“Season’s Greetings! I apologise for my slow response but a roast goose prevented me from answering emails for a few days.”

“Always dear EMI takes care of its referees, providing them with entertainment for the holiday time in between Xmas and New Year. Plus the server shows, as usual, its inhuman nature and continues to send reminding messages. Well, between playing tennis on the Wii, eating and drinking, I found time and some strength of mind to do this work.”

“I agreed to review this Ms whilst answering e-mails in the golden glow of a balmy evening on the terrace of our holiday hotel on Lake Como. Back in the harsh light of reality in Belfast I realize that it’s just on the limit of my comfort zone and that it would probably have been better not to have volunteered.”

(from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2010.02394.x/full, accessed Jan. 2011)

Do you peer review? If so, I thank you for volunteering your time and effort. A constructive, thorough review is a thing of beauty and of great benefit to editors and authors, along with the eventual readers who will see a final article that was improved through an author’s response to well-thought-out comments.