🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan9.113916.27542@fuug.fi>, an3329@anon.penet.fi writes:
>I'm a graduate student and I have a bit of a problem
>with my advisor.  He gave me some papers to referee,
>and these papers were submitted to a conference to
>which I have also submitted a paper. The problem is
>that these papers are very similar to the paper which
>I submitted, and so they will be competing directly 
>against my paper. I told him that I could not act as 
>an impartial reviewer, and I asked to have someone else
>review the papers, but he refused.  (He is also the
>conference co-chairman).  He said that it was perfectly
>acceptable for me to review the papers, but I don't believe 
>him.  What do I do?  I was thinking of refusing to review
>the papers by not submitting a report, and just let the
>deadline slip.  Please respond by posting because this 
>site does not have secure e-mail. 
> 

    Though I am not really familiar with the reviewing process, it seems
as if there is something of an ethical dilemma.   On the one hand, since
the work is similar to yours, you would seem qualified to make some judgments
on the work.   On the other, you may have some quota of papers that should
be accepted, and you may feel that there is a perception that you rejected a paper
to make yours look good.

    Given that your advisor is your advisor, and that you may not have
anyone to back you up on this, I would probably suggest that you go
ahead and review it.   Also, given that you feel that there may be
ethical problems, one would assume that you would be able review the
papers without ulterior motives because you are already worried about
improprieties.

    You could also consider trying to talk to other professors to see whether
this is really a problem, though professors can be friends with one another, 
and you may feel the need for confidentiality.

--
Charles Lin
clin@eng.umd.edu