Comments on The General Blog of Crime: Book Review Issues

Good for you for standing up for your research int...

2008-04-02T08:41:00.000-04:00

Good for you for standing up for your research interests (in the context of both the subject and quality of said research). I have never been one to kow-tow (perhaps to my own detriment), and I think you did the right thing by being brutally honest.

Good points, everyone. Thanks for the input!

2008-04-01T20:00:00.000-04:00

Good points, everyone. Thanks for the input!

When I was a grad student, a paper was published i...

2008-04-01T14:57:00.000-04:00

When I was a grad student, a paper was published in a top tier journal by a professor at my undergraduate institution. He assessed the relationship between age and crime, and his conclusions were not supportive of the (then) new General Theory of Crime.

Since he used data from the NYS, I was able to download it and re-run some of his models. He didn't make any errors, but I found that a simple recoding of a variable resulted in slightly different findings.

I struggled with how to proceed. My mentor in graduate school pushed me to submit a research note to the journal (along the lines of Ackerman & Schwartz in Criminology, although the article they critique was fraught with problems and sloppy research). I was terrified of publishing something that called into question the findings of one of my former professors. My mentor's advice:

"Well, you may piss him off, but Goffredson and Hirschi will LOVE you. What's the down side?"

I ended up not moving forward with it, mostly because I thought my recoding didn't change the original findings all that much. However, I regret that decision now--I think you have to be steadfast in your commitment to the field, and screw anyone who has personal problems with it. Our mission is to advance knowledge, not make friends, forward agendas or publish biased research.

In the end, you'll garner more respect for being strong in your views. If you make a few enemies, oh well... Everyone has an enemy or two in academe...

Honesty is always the best policy, because your re...

2008-04-01T14:04:00.000-04:00

Honesty is always the best policy, because your reputation is at stake when you glowingly recommend a book that is a piece of doo doo. But you can be honest and respectful at the same time.

It is certainly appropriate that you point out problems or concerns. If there are any strengths, point them out as well. I think at our stage in our careers it is best to convey impartiality in published book reviews to the extent possible.

With respect to article reviews, I usually don't pull any punches. I always try to be constructive, but I am less concerned about the fallout. There is a lot of crap out there. Most of it is written by me, but other people write crap too...

I've never had this problem with a book review but...

2008-04-01T13:18:00.000-04:00

I've never had this problem with a book review but I struggle a lot with article reviews -- and returning with a critical review for an article doesn't have nearly the consequences of what you describe (e.g., it's not published, it's anonymous, etc). That said, I think the same rules apply and, if you offer up something that is scathing and not at all constructive, the editor still knows who you are and I think that makes a [bad] impression. As a junior scholar, I care a lot (perhaps too much) about what editors think of me.

I've recently reviewed two papers - one that the editor should never have sent out (it read like a first draft for an undergrad course) and one that was just bad but did pass the 'reviewable' bar. I always start with "this paper needs significant revision before publication" and try to find something positive (whether the idea, the method, the question). I also try to link fixing a big problem to a strength of the paper (e.g., the paper is missing a huge piece of the literature, but if you added it, your argument related to X would be much more powerful). Anyway, my two cents. I read your review, it read as very tough but also fair -- you certainly were upfront about your own viewpoint.

Brave but professional. I am not brave and would ...

2008-04-01T10:06:00.000-04:00

Brave but professional. I am not brave and would have elected not to do the review. Let us know if you hear from the authors!