Subscribe
Subscribe
MY AMERICAN SCIENTIST
LOG IN! REGISTER!
SEARCH
 
Logo IMG
HOME > PAST ISSUE > Article Detail

LETTERS TO THE EDITORS

Reluctant Book Reviewers

To the Editors:

Book Reviewing in the Sciences,” in the July–August issue of American Scientist, made interesting reading but failed to mention my principal concern as a book review editor. Stated simply: Who, today, wants to review a book? Scientists—indeed, all academics—are judged on their ability to publish research papers in the leading peer-reviewed journals, to gather more and bigger research grants and, perhaps, little else. The humble book review is not seen as an essential part of this academic landscape. It can take several attempts and rejections before I am able to place even the most worthy of books with a reviewer. Although some reviewers are at pains to return a timely and well-written review, others sink into anonymity once they have received the book, and even stop answering e-mails.

There is no cure for this situation. It is a product of our culture and the often excessive demands on the time of modern scientists. Every book review editor will take note of reviewers who provide readable reviews on deadline, and will call on those reviewers again. But many potential reviewers choose to decline this worthy task that provides such an obvious service to their fellow scientists.

Stephen K. Donovan
Book review editor, Geological Journal
Naturalis Biodiversity Centre
Leiden, The Netherlands


comments powered by Disqus
 

EMAIL TO A FRIEND :

Of Possible Interest

Feature Article: Like Holding a Piece of Sky

Technologue: Weighing the Kilogram

Feature Article: Quietest Places in the World

 

Other Related Links

Book Reviewing in the Sciences: A Conversation

Subscribe to American Scientist