Okay #AcademicTwitter I know its the holidays but we need to talk about semantic complaints in peer reviews 1/13

So, theres a pedantic, fragile, and ineffective way to critique authors’ word choice; and there’s a reflexive, scholarly, and helpful way to do it. As I’ve been on both the receiving & giving ends, I’ll cover both  2/13

As an author, over the years I’ve received reviews that contain whole paragraphs of a reviewer emotionally reacting to a single word or phrase. Words that have brought forth such angst include but are not limited to: double minority, proficiently, and mime. 3/13

What is frustrating about these types of semantic complaints is that they clearly stem primarily from the reviewer’s personal perspective, not primarily from their professional knowledge of the field, English, or contemporary language usage norms. 4/13

Why did I use “double minority” to refer to Black/Asian & Black/Native ppl? A Jewish woman is a double minority too you know! Yes but THIS paper is specifically on #mixedrace racial identity development; it’s not abt anyone with any two minority statuses 5/13

What does to “mime” at someone in Chinese mean? Miming isnt language specific. Oh oops, your settler privilege & lack of knowledge of the microaggression literature have you hung up on a word that describes an experience that many immigrant 5yo olds have had 6/13

In these comments, reviewers 1) complain abt the word bc it doesnt match THEIR narrow understanding of it and 2) STOP there. This makes the comments more like a toddler tantrum over getting the red vs blue sippy cup than a serious scholarly critique 7/13

One of the very first peer reviews I ever received contained unhelpful semantic complaints like this, and so I vowed to never be that reviewer. When I review papers, if I don’t quite get an author’s word choice heres what I do: 8/13

First, if its a word I’m unfamiliar with, I both Google it & look it up on Google Scholar. 9 times out of 10 it’s either a synonym I didnt know, a niche sub-field term I didnt know, or an ethnic/cultural term I didnt know 9/13

In short, I dont approach reviewing with the expectation that every. single. individual. word and phrase in the. whole. manuscript. must be instantly & effortlessly intelligible to ME. I dont assume that if I dont like or understand a word its obviously used incorrectly.  10/13

Second, if its a word Im familiar with & I feel it is used inappropriately, I say that but then ALSO explain WHY & list ALTERNATIVES (plural). Peer review should be helpful. Tearing down w/o explanation & w/o suggestions for rebuilding is literally just being destructive. 11/13

Finally, I also indicate if I feel like revising the word or phrase is fundamental to effectively conveying the argument/topic of the paper, or if it is a minor detail that I just personally think will increase the paper’s “scholarly” tone or general “readability.” 12/13

In conclusion, IMHO paragraph long rants abt a single word or phrase have no place in peer review comments. Send that to your lab mate or grad school bestie then write a peer review letter that is professional, author-centered, and that offers guidance for improvement. 13/13