Review and critique of the papers published in international proceedings.pptx

1. Review And Critique Of The Papers
Published In International Proceedings
Presented by:
UMAIRA ISRAR
2020-Mphil-1769
MPHIL PHARMASECUTICS

2. Conference Proceedings
• Nature: Collection of academic
papers published in the context of
an academic conference or workshop
• Contribution: Typically contributions are
made by researchers, in form of written
record of the work presented to fellow
researchers
• Category: Usually published as
supplements to academic journals;
considered the main dissemination route;
or often considered as grey literature.
• Distribution: usually distributed in printed
or electronic volumes, either before the
conference opens or after it has closed.

3. PUBLICATION
• Form: Conference proceedings may be published as a book or book
series, in a journal, or otherwise as a serial publication.
• Publishers: Conference proceedings are published in-house by the
organizing institution of the conference or via an academic publisher.
• Editorial team: Selecting and collecting papers for conferences is
organized by one or more persons, who form the editorial team.
• Quality: In the sciences, the quality of publications in conference
proceedings is usually not as high as that of international scientific
journals.

4. Proceeding Publication Process
Visibility: are visible at CrossRef, Google Scholar, Scilit. OUCI, PKP Index,
Microsoft Academic, Dimensions, BASE, OpenAIRE, Semantic Scholar etc
Matter: Full-length articles of any national or international conference/workshop
organized by academic or research institutions are published.
Editorial team: Proceedings are assigned ISSN, ISBN, and DOI.
Journal: Proceedings usually published separately as monographic series. Even
though proceedings usually contain ISSN, ISBN & DOI but usually proceedings
and journals are treated separately and hence it not included in any journal.

5. Conference Paper:
Abreast of research in field
Contains exciting part, novel &
Innovation.
Shorter & Sharper contains
essence
intended to specialized
audience
Publication process is quicker
Work may further develop in
subsequent articles
• Journal Paper:
• Archival & intended to last for
sometime
• Contains complete detail for
understanding
• Longer & round out of the
subject
• intended to generalized
audience
• Publication process is often
very long.
• Work is fully described and
article is self-contained.

6. Purpose of Refereeing
The primary duty of the program committee is to ensure the integrity
and the reliability of the research literature.
People who attend the conference, or who consult its Proceedings in
the future, must be confident that the results reported here are
honest, accurate, and may be relied upon.

7. • Because acceptance or rejection of papers sometimes has significant
personal or professional consequences, it is important that reviewers
avoid conflict of interest.

8. Obligations of a Reviewer
• SYMPATHY
• ANONYMITY: Referee
reports are anonymous,
and in writing them it is
best to be courteous but
frank, candid and direct.
Reviews are sent to the
primary author of each
paper, but the identity of
the reviewer is not
disclosed to authors.

9. Obligations of a Reviewer
• COMMENTS TO THE COMMITTEE: can assist the authors in
improving their work for example , “I found the paper
unobjectionable but extremely dull; accepting it will cause no harm,
but rejecting it would not cause much harm, either”.
• CONFIDENTIALITY: Papers submitted to the conference are
confidential until they are published.

10. What might a Reviewer consider
Major issues must be considered and addressed
• BLUNDERS AND ERRORS OF FACT
• ERRORS OF METHODOLOGY
• ERRORS OF INTERPRETATION

11. Major Issues
• MULTIPLE SUBMISSIONS AND PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED WORK
• FAILURE TO EVALUATE OR REFLECT UPON A SYSTEM OR FEATURE'S
ACTUAL PERFORMANCE
• ORIGINALITY
• FAILURE TO POSITION THE WORK WITH RESPECT TO OTHER
RESEARCH

12. Major Issues
• OPACITY: problems with English as a second language •
mathematical or notational sophistication • dependence on
unfamiliar theory or terminology
• FRAUD: Outright fraud — false or irreproducible results, plagiarism,
and other unethical practice

13. Reviewer Comments
• Improvement: the peer reviewers may give Suggestions for
improvements
• Less than publishable: may find the paper to be less than a least
publishable unit.
• Less than improvable: the reviewers may identify flaws beyond repair.