To further thank and recognise the support from our excellent reviewer community, we are highlighting reviewers who have provided exceptional support to the journal over the past year.
This month, we’ll be highlighting Dr Elisabeth Prince, Professor Ulf-Peter Apfel, Dr Manuel Nappi and Professor John Murphy. We asked our reviewers a few questions about what they enjoy about reviewing, and their thoughts on how to provide a useful review.
Dr Elisabeth Prince, University of Waterloo. In Dr Elisabeth Prince’s lab, they study the interplay between the architecture of polymer networks and their functional properties. They leverage their knowledge to improve the recyclability of polymer networks and to create biomimetic hydrogels for healthcare.
Dr Manuel Nappi, University of Santiago de Compostela. Dr Manuel Nappi’s group is dedicated to the invention of new sustainable chemical transformations at the interface of synthetic chemistry, biochemistry, and material science. Currently, they are working on the metal-free conversion of simple organic feedstocks into valuable molecules using visible light.
Professor Ulf-Peter Apfel, Ruhr-Universität Bochum. Professor Ulf-Peter Apfel’s group focuses on the development of electrochemical processes for water splitting, CO2 reduction, and bio- as well as organoelectrochemical processes, spanning from catalyst development to establishing pilot plant systems.
Professor John Murphy, University of Strathclyde. Professor John Murphy is interested in organic reaction mechanisms and particularly those related to radicals and radical ions.
What encouraged you to review for Chemical Science?
Dr Elisabeth Prince: Reviewing is important service to the scientific community, and it’s always more enjoyable to do that service when the articles are at the cutting edge. The articles I’ve read and reviewed in Chemical Science have been interdisciplinary, innovative, and very engaging, which makes my job as the reviewer fun.
Dr Manuel Nappi: Chemical Science is the flagship journal of the Royal Society of Chemistry, publishing cutting-edge science. As reviewer and author, I am happy and honoured to help maintain and improve this exceptional level.
Professor Ulf-Peter Apfel: I understand reviewing to be an essential part of my duty to the community. Moreover, it provides me with the opportunity to collaborate with authors, enhancing the quality of their work, and it also helps me develop the skills needed to write excellent research papers from different perspectives.
Professor John Murphy: The relevance of the papers to my interests and the quality of papers published by the journal.
What do you enjoy most about reviewing?
Professor John Murphy: The ability to see the very latest advances and, hopefully, to provide helpful feedback to the authors.
Dr Elisabeth Prince: I love seeing my feedback improve the quality of an article, whether it be by improving how its communicated or by clarifying the results. It’s very rewarding to help make the author’s work shine.
Dr Manuel Nappi: The most exciting part of reviewing for Chemical Science is the opportunity to read groundbreaking science before publication and contribute for its improvement.
What are you looking for in a paper that you can recommend for acceptance in Chemical Science?
Dr Manuel Nappi: Originality and novelty are the keystones for a publication in Chemical Science. The authors should clearly explain how the chemistry differs from the state of the art, highlighting the innovative aspects of their work.
What has been your biggest learning point from reviewing?
Dr Elisabeth Prince: Reviewing reminds me to think like a reviewer when writing my own papers. I always try to take a step back from my paper and think about what I would bring up as the reviewer.
What advice would you give a first-time author looking to maximise their chances of successful peer review?
Professor Ulf-Peter Apfel: Ensure that your scientific work presents robust evidence through well-reproducible experiments, while maintaining an easy-to-follow narrative that showcases your enthusiasm without exaggerating the significance of your findings.
Tune in next month to meet our next group of #ChemSciReviewers!
If you want to learn more about how we support our reviewers, check out our Reviewer Hub.
Interested in joining our ever-growing reviewer community? Apply here now!
