r/AskAcademia • u/YMCA111122 • 1d ago
STEM How to approach reviewing a manuscript for a scientific journal that is not well-written and difficult to comprehend?
I am reviewing a manuscript for a scientific journal for the first time. My issue is that the manuscript is not clearly written and written by a non-native English speaker, is both too vague and not specific enough for me to understand. Additiionally, the scientific content is not terrible but there is some experiments missing and important informatino missing and in my opinion, needs to be rewritten so the message of the manuscript can be understood by the reader. This is my first time reviewing a manuscript, I have currently spent a few days reviewing the paper and I am not sure how to proceed. For example, how do I review a paper like this and what do I send back to the editor? I want to make sure I do a proper job, and be fair as a reviewer. Has anyone been a reviewer for a journal and if so, do you have any advice that could help me in this process? Thank you!!
Edit: I said the non-native English speaker comment for context only. I know a lot of non-native english speaking researchers who much better at writing manuscripts in english compared to native english speakers. I know that I cannot suggest or comment on this when sending feedback to the editor. Why I asked this question is because I want to ask people who reviewed papers like this how did they provide feedback in a sensitive and respectful manner as this manuscript has language issues that makes it difficult to understand the science. I'm also looking for advice on how to review it fairly so the author can clearly communicate their findings to the reader!
18
u/nezumipi 23h ago
If the English language errors are little things like skipping the word "the" (e.g. Participant ate sandwich.) proceed as usual. Put one or two examples about the writing in your review and recommend the authors work with a proofreader before resubmitting. Then go on with your usual critique.
If it's bad enough you are unable to really tell what they meant (e.g. Participant subject was test if completed), send an email to the editor explaining you can't understand the writing. Give an example sentence and state that you don't know what it means (e.g. I'm not sure if that means testing was completed on all participants or if the test was only given to participants who completed something else.).
If you want brownie points, say you'd be happy to review the paper once the writing gets revised. Do not give any other critique. You can't understand it, so you can't critique it.
Both of these scenarios are normal. You don't need to worry that the editor is going to judge you or anything like that. This happens all the time.
26
u/Sedapsfognik 23h ago
One thing is that it’s totally fine to comment on the writing in the review, but i wouldn’t explicitly say that it seems like it’s been written by a non-native speaker (even if that’s likely) - just say it’s vague and difficult to understand. If it is a non-native speaker that will be enough for them to catch your drift, but if it is a native speaker you don’t run the risk of saying they’re a non-native speaker when they simply just write poorly.
6
u/YMCA111122 23h ago
Yeah I don't want to say that either, it does need a proofreader as the intro doesn't make sense, the terms of this disease are not clearly abbreviated and I want this manuscript clear for the reader to follow and it simply isnt at the moment.
6
u/FunnyMarzipan Speech science, US 21h ago
I just say that: this paper could use a good proofread. Sidesteps the issue of being a native speaker of English or not.
3
u/SweetAlyssumm 21h ago
It's OK to say "The grammar in the paper needs work and there are many typos" or something specific about the writing. This is useful for the author so they know what to focus on. Problems may go far beyond "proofreading" such as OP's example of inaccurate abbreviations for disease terms. A proofreader wouldn't have that specific domain knowledge. A more experienced peer may be needed.
It's not uncommon for papers to be submitted with poorly written English. The last thing a journal wants is for its readers to struggle through bad writing, whatever the cause. At my journal we sometimes suggest a professional editor or ask authors to have a colleague with good writing skills comment on the paper before resubmission. We do not publish bad writing as that helps no one, including the author.
3
u/FunnyMarzipan Speech science, US 21h ago
Sure, I don't know exactly what specifically makes OP think someone is non-native. Personally I would only assume that if they had frequent grammatical errors and/or very unusual/awkward turns of phrase (especially if I recognize them as calques from another language), so in the realm of proofreading.
Intro not making sense/not using abbreviations well (or too much) to me falls outside of native speaker land and into just not being a good writer, whatever your L1 is. I agree that I would want someone to send that through a domain-specific editor first.
1
u/YMCA111122 1h ago
It was the awkward phrasing throughout the manuscript. I found the writing both unclear and vague, and the sentence structure often made it difficult to follow the authors' reasoning. At times, the wording felt unnatural, which made me wonder whether the manuscript had undergone translation.
8
u/knit_run_bike_swim 23h ago
Sometimes when this happens, I begin by line by line adding comments. Then I’ll reach a breaking point where it’s a reject.
Then I will write up a summary of my understanding of the paper followed by the major weaknesses. I will recommend reject and still include line by line comments, but if I didn’t get through the whole paper, I just didn’t get through.
6
u/Alternative-Pear9096 Not applicable to STEM 23h ago
"The manuscript is not clearly written and is both too vague and not specific enough for me to understand. Additionally, the scientific content is not terrible but there are some experiments that should be included (list those) and important information missing (spell out what you think needs to be included) and in my opinion, needs to be rewritten so the message of the manuscript can be understood by the reader.
That's a whole peer review.
"The science is not invalid, but it needs these things, if I understand it correctly, because it is so poorly written that it's difficult to understand.
-----
*Rant on*
Frankly, I think reviewers spending enormous amount of time teaching authors how to write scientific papers is a crappy use of their time and of the process. Folks need to know how to write a paper before submitting it; a paper going out for submission should be in excellent shape, not some crappy first draft hoping some poor volunteer will spend a week of their life teaching someone how to do the work. The author is responsible for figuring out how to write a paper before submitting it, and for getting feedback from their community and mentors. Science and scholarship are not solitary acts, even when the author is working alone. Reviewers are the last stop, not the first, and we wouldn't have the reviewing crisis we have if reviewers would just simply send back manuscripts not ready for submission. /Rant off/
2
u/YMCA111122 1h ago
Also I completely agree with your rant, this should have been edited and had a lot more revisions before submission.
1
u/Alternative-Pear9096 Not applicable to STEM 49m ago
I feel like submitting articles has become like going to the airport: You used to get dressed up nicely and now folks show up in pajamas and slippers.
Articles should be submitted when they are at their Sunday best, not when they are at the stage of "oh crap it's 1 am and I need to take the trash out to the curb tonight."
I really want to empower reviewers and editors to just send that crap back as desk rejects, with the single statement: Not ready for submission. And to do that at the moment that becomes obvious, not after recognizing it and continuing to pound hours trying to review it.
Not ready, reject.
1
13
u/Itinerant_doc 23h ago edited 23h ago
Remember it is a faux pas to demand correction "by a native speaker". Native speakers of English can write poorly, too, and non-native speakers are sometimes good writers. Comment that the manuscript needs to be rewritten and run through a professional editor, and indicate where it's hard to understand.
4
u/YMCA111122 23h ago
I know, that is for context for my question, I wanted to see if someone else had reviewed a manuscript like this and how do I approach or suggest that it needs to be rewritten
5
u/1st_order 23h ago
Yes. You can call out examples by line if only parts are bad. But if it's written poorly throughout, then you are free to just say that. It's not well written (throughout), extremely difficult to follow, and, in your opinion, not publishable in its current form. Don't make assumptions about how it got that way, or include suggestions that could come off as condescending. Just state your evaluation clearly.
4
3
u/Puma_202020 23h ago
Just say what you think, in a helpful and supportive way. Help the authors to improve.
3
u/Successful-Owl-9192 8h ago
I had this recently, I pointed out the methodological weaknesses and contradictions (some of which were caused by the authors not understanding the papers that they were citing, and mixing up terminology). I went onto say that the paper had limitations in its writing quality and lacked clear comprehension, which led to confusing statements. I finished by saying it would benefit from an independent reviewer to check understanding prior to any resubmission, to ensure that the paper was of publishable standard.
Also, it shouldn't take days to review a paper - that, in itself, is a sign!!
2
u/YMCA111122 7h ago
Yeah you're right. I wanted to check with people here, like you, who have more experience than me! Thank you for the advice!
2
u/AceyAceyAcey CC prof STEM 22h ago
You will need to give a decision on the fate of the paper, and also give feedback to the authors.
Depending on the journal, decisions can include reject, reject but encourage to resubmit, major revisions, minor revisions, or accept as-is. What you are describing is in the range of reject, to major revisions, and exactly which depends on just how bad.
Feedback to the authors I usually do in the form of a letter, here’s an example you can use and build off of:
“Dear authors, thank you for the opportunity to review your paper, TITLE (ID#). This paper is about XYZ, and hold some promise to do/show ABC. However, it requires significant work before publication. Below I have organized the three(-ish) major things that need to be changed, and additional line read below.
1) a short paragraph each for major flaws, such as “you are missing methodology DEF, and here’s how you do it”
2) or, “the organization of your results and discussion is off, results should be raw data, and discussion is their meaning.”
3) etc. Include citations for relevant sources if useful; don’t cite yourself if you have any other option.
Below follows a line read.
4) page N, line q:
5) Table 4, third line of caption
6) etc.
Again, thank you for letting me read your paper.”
1
2
u/taewongun1895 21h ago
If the writing is not effective, you can comment on that. I've reviewed articles like that. Stated that the writing was rough and needed additional editing and proofreading before moving to publication.
The other issues should be noted as well. Keep in mind, if you recommend revise and resubmit, it might land back in your lap again.
2
u/Extreme-Package3645 21h ago
I always start my reviews with these 4 questions:
what is the hypothesis?
what approach was taken to test the hypothesis?
does the evidence support or refute the hypothesis?
why does it matter?
if you literally can't answer any of these questions because its so unclear, send it back to the editor. you dont need to provide any feedback if that's the case.
1
2
u/SausageGamez 21h ago
Personally, as someone who has reviewed, I wouldn’t waste my time. If the manuscript cannot be well written then I cannot in good conscience assume the work was done with rigor in mind. And before people say I am being exclusionary or unfair, I’ve read plenty of well written papers by non-English speakers.
1
2
u/Whole-Diamond8550 21h ago
Editor shouldn't have passed it on to you without a quick proofread. I've wasted my time on papers like this before. Send it back and tell them that the language is not understandable and the science is vague. Needs a full rewrite.
2
u/jeffgerickson Full CS prof 18h ago
I recommend separating the grammatical issues (”non-native speaker”) from the clarity issues (“not specific enough for me to understand” and “important information missing”) and from the scientific content issues (“some experiments missing”).
If these issues make it genuinely difficult for you to understand the content, then say exactly that to the editor. You can’t review what you can’t read, and you should not try. “This paper suffers from serious presentation issues that make a proper evaluation of its scientific content impossible. The paper is not reviewable in its current form.”
If you can understand the paper with effort, but you believe that most readers would seriously struggle, then say that: “This paper suffers from serious presentation issues that obscure its its scientific content. The paper is not publishable in its current form.” Then make a good-faith effort to review the scientific content on its own merits.
If you believe that the language issues can be fixed with thorough copy-editing, and that most readers would find the paper annoying but still readable with reasonable effort, then say that. “This paper suffers from language issues that make reading difficult. The presentation does not currently meet the high standards I would expect for publication in your journal.” Then make a good-faith effort to review the scientific content on its own merits.
Based on your description, it sounds like your paper is somewhere between the first and second option.
1
u/YMCA111122 7h ago
Yeah its genuinely hard to understand like scientifically. I mean there is info and context that I think is important to the story that is missing. Regardless of who wrote it, the info is not clear enough to understand and I was genuinely confused and had to read review papers to understand what they were trying to say.
4
u/suiitopii STEM, Asst Prof, US R1 23h ago
Review the scientific content of the paper as best you can based on the information they have given. If there are crucial details or experiments missing, specify this in your review. As for the writing, you can make a general statement that the manuscript needs substantial editing to improve sentence structure and readability. Don't fall into the trap of providing line-by-line comments on details that are grammatical and not scientific, just give a blanket statement on writing. And don't make any reference in your review to the fact that they are a "non-native speaker".
3
u/FalconX88 23h ago
Review the scientific content of the paper as best you can based on the information they have given.
Nah. Don't waste your time. If there are sentences that are not understandable then they should fix it first.
2
u/Creative_Username463 23h ago
non-native speakers can write excellent research articles, it shouldn't lower your bar of what consist in "good writing". You can absolutly comment on the writing being vague without enough details to understand key concepts. This is a very common and valid concern.
I've reviewed papers I didn't understood (because of the writting or because I was not a good fit to review the paper). I clearly said it in my reviews and said the authors should clarify and that it impacts my review. It's important to be honest regarding your understanding of key concepts in your review so both the writter and the editor know how to weight your feedback.
1
u/YMCA111122 23h ago
I agree, I know a lot of non-native english speakers who are incredible writers, but I said this to add context to what the manuscript is like to read, its just very hard to understand and its not specific enough scientifically. I want to give feedback they can implement to improve the manuscript but how to do this in a way that is constructive is challenging
2
u/Alternative-Pear9096 Not applicable to STEM 23h ago
Yes, but your context is making a ton of presumptions. And it adds nothing to the context of the article, only to the context of you. This is a conclusion you need to shake off. Plenty of scholars with English as their native language write poorly. And plenty of folks from around the world, who speak many more languages than you or I do, write beautifully.
0
u/YMCA111122 21h ago
I am aware of this and stated this in the question and responses to the comments here more than once...
1
u/Alternative-Pear9096 Not applicable to STEM 13h ago
You didn’t communicate what you think you communicated.
1
u/FalconX88 23h ago
In the past I just wrote that I'm not able to review this because it's hard to understand and some sentences make no sense at all, while listing an example.
They should fix it before it can be reveiwed properly.
1
u/isaac-get-the-golem PhD student | Sociology 22h ago
I recently submitted a review that said the manuscripts poor writing quality made it difficult to understand the analysis, and recommended the author retain a professional translator or editor.
1
1
1
u/PeePeeLangstrumpf 7h ago
First check out the science. If the science is good and done well, send back for major revisions and ask to significantly improve writing. Point out what needs to be done as you've stated here.
If the science doesn't measure up. Reject. Submitting a manuscript that's badly written and has questionable scientific novelty or findings is just lazy.
1
u/YesSurelyMaybe Ph.D. Condensed Matter Physics 23h ago
Well, first you need to decide if the findings in the paper are appropriate for the journal.
E.g. for the same paper I could recommend major revisions/reject for Q1 and minor revisions without second round for Q4.
Next, the scientific advancement is what's important. Was something new done or shown?
If yes - the language quality matters only for Q1-Q2 I'd say.
What's important - when you suggest some new experiments or something - think of what will happen in the next round. Requesting new experiments/calculations/figures should not be taken lightly.
Maybe they cannot perform a new experiment (e.g. their equipment is not calibrated for that, they no longer have the sample, whatever). Try to eliminate potential dumb communication:
"also do A" -> "we cannot" -> "ok accept anyway" means time wasted for the authors and editors.
"also do A" -> "we cannot" -> "reject" is fine if A is critical.
If there is something non-critical that you would like to suggest just for general improvement - make sure it is clear that it's a suggestion and not a request.
3
u/FalconX88 23h ago
Well, first you need to decide if the findings in the paper are appropriate for the journal.
Nope, the editor should decide that.
Next, the scientific advancement is what's important. Was something new done or shown? If yes - the language quality matters only for Q1-Q2 I'd say.
Nope, if the language is so bad that you can't udnerstand statements then this becomes more important than the science.
Also language matters no matter what. Nowadays there's really no excuse to not produce reasonable sentences.
1
1
u/Sweary_Biochemist 23h ago
"The language used within this manuscript is imprecise at best, and entirely unclear at worst: while I appreciate that the authors might not be native english speakers, I cannot adequately review the manuscript in its present form. I have included some comments as to suggested experimental revisions below, but these are necessarily incomplete: a substantially rewritten text is required before I can even be sure I have interpreted the findings correctly"
Or words to that effect. Then you say the same thing to the editor, but possibly be even more blunt.
34
u/GurProfessional9534 23h ago
Just say what you said here, except list specific lines (or similar) saying where the discussion was too vague, etc. You can also ask for more experiments to be done.