Articles | Volume 3, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-89-2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-89-2020
Research article
 | Highlight paper
 | 
21 Apr 2020
Research article | Highlight paper |  | 21 Apr 2020

The benefits to climate science of including early-career scientists as reviewers

Mathieu Casado, Gwenaëlle Gremion, Paul Rosenbaum, Jilda Alicia Caccavo, Kelsey Aho, Nicolas Champollion, Sarah L. Connors, Adrian Dahood, Alfonso Fernandez, Martine Lizotte, Katja Mintenbeck, Elvira Poloczanska, and Gerlis Fugmann

Viewed

Total article views: 5,369 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
4,207 1,082 80 5,369 96 93 88
  • HTML: 4,207
  • PDF: 1,082
  • XML: 80
  • Total: 5,369
  • Supplement: 96
  • BibTeX: 93
  • EndNote: 88
Views and downloads (calculated since 10 Oct 2019)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 10 Oct 2019)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 5,369 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 4,513 with geography defined and 856 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 24 Feb 2024
Download
Short summary
Early-career scientists (ECSs) are rarely invited to act as peer reviewers. Participating in a group peer review of the IPCC Special Report on Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, PhD students spent more time reviewing than more established scientists and provided a similar proportion of substantive comments. By soliciting and including ECSs in peer review, the scientific community would reduce the burden on more established scientists and may improve the quality of that process.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint