Recounts one professor's discouraging experience with the process of submitting articles for publication in prestigious peer reviewed journals. Notes the wide disparity in comments from the reviewers ranging from corrective and helpful to condescending and dismissive. Detailed responses from the editors appear duplicitous and confusing. (MJP)

Responds to recent scathing criticism of the peer review process of scholarly publishing. Identifies three main problems with reviewers and editors: unresponsiveness, inconsistency, and indecisiveness. Discusses the pros and cons of several proposed publishing reforms including multiple submissions, establishing clearer and more consistent…