EB1-EA- Clarification regarding Participation in review activity

V

vamsi23

Registered Users (C)
Hi All,

I am filing my EB1-EA petition on my own. I have one clarification regarding participation in judging other's work. I have participated in NSF panel and one international (Europe) panel, and serving as a reviewer fro more than 10 journals and so far I reviewed more than 40 manuscripts. My questions are

(1) Can I submit the invitation e-mail to support my participation in NSF and other panels?
(2) Do I need to get letters from the Editors of all 10 journals (indicating how they select reviewers, etc.) or it is sufficient to provide the invitation letters?
(3) I also noted that some RFE questioned based on invitation letters/e-mails, whether the applicant has actually performed the review or not? In that case can I include the screen shot of reviewer account showing the manuscripts reviewed by me for each journal?
(4) This is similar to my 3rd question. I have deleted some of the invitations. So can I include the screen shot of reviewer account?

I appreciate you all if you can kindly clarify my questions.
Tanks in advance.
Vamsi
 
BigJoe5

Many thanks for the reply. I have the evidence showing that I actually performed the review for NSF and other funding agency.

Due to large number of manuscripts I reviewed for journals, can I use the screen shot of my account showing the manuscripts reviewed by me for each journal?

or

I should get letters from the Editors of all 10 journals (indicating how they select reviewers, etc.)

Any suggestions?
Thanks again for your help
Vamsi
 
vamsi23 said:
BigJoe5

Many thanks for the reply. I have the evidence showing that I actually performed the review for NSF and other funding agency.

Due to large number of manuscripts I reviewed for journals, can I use the screen shot of my account showing the manuscripts reviewed by me for each journal?

or

I should get letters from the Editors of all 10 journals (indicating how they select reviewers, etc.)

Any suggestions?
Thanks again for your help
Vamsi
Click to expand...

IMO, it is better to ask the editors to give you letters thanking you for performing the reviews. That would serve as a more convincing proof that the reviews have been completed, compared with a printout of some screenshot. I don't think it is necessary for you to ask the editors to explain in detail how selection of reviewers/referees works, but if they can include at least a brief mention of that in their "thank you" letters, that would be helpful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
baikal3 said:
IMO, it is better to ask the editors to give you letters thanking you for performing the reviews. That would serve as a more convincing proof that the reviews have been completed, compared with a printout of some screenshot. I don't think it is necessary for you to ask the editors to explain in detail how selection of reviewers/referees works, but if they can include at least a brief mention of that in their "thank you" letters, that would be helpful.
Click to expand...

I agree with this approach, it is more professional. You can include web addresses so that the adjudicator can spot check a few to be satisfied that the letters are legitimate. They would check anyway but being proactive speeds up THEIR review to YOUR benefit. Making the adjudicator's job easier is always in your best interest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top