Reviewer Number 3
@thirdreviewer
Your paper sucks
This paper is more appropriate for a speciality journal. Like, one that specializes in terrible papers.
it’s not impostor syndrome your work is actually bad
submitting your paper to nature, only to have it desk rejected immediately
each @hubermanlab paper has only a 20% chance of being accepted by me, but he submits them 6 times so I have no choice by the end
Does tweeting increase citations? We conducted an experiment with 110 tweeted papers and 440 controls, waited 3 years for citations to accumulate... and found no significant increase in citations journals.plos.org/plosone/articl…
Does tweeting increase citations? We conducted an experiment with 110 tweeted papers and 440 controls, waited 3 years for citations to accumulate... and found no significant increase in citations journals.plos.org/plosone/articl…
the review process
The door to academic success
When the editor does nothing as I trash your paper
when Reviewer 1’s comments are just as fierce as mine
using this in my next review
you are trying to solve the wrong problem using the wrong methods based on a wrong model of the world derived from poor thinking and unfortunately all of your mistakes have failed to cancel out
your paper after the revisions I requested
turning the review process into a discussion of my completely irrelevant work (world cup edition)
Happy to recommend an R&R: Reject and Re-examine your life choices