Pros and cons of writing a book review?Pros and cons on commenting on public review papers

Placement of positioning lights on A320 winglets

Fastest way from 10 to 1 with everyone in between

Can artificial satellite positions affect tides?

I sent an angry e-mail to my interviewers about a conflict at my home institution. Could this affect my application?

Must a CPU have a GPU if the motherboard provides a display port (when there isn't any separate video card)?

Why is my Taiyaki (Cake that looks like a fish) too hard and dry?

Is it ethical to cite a reviewer's papers even if they are rather irrelevant?

I received a gift from my sister who just got back from

ISP is not hashing the password I log in with online. Should I take any action?

Do the Shadow Magic sorcerer's Strength of the Grave feature and the half-orc's Relentless Endurance trait work together?

How to turn a table by 90° and split variables in two or more lines

Print the phrase "And she said, 'But that's his.'" using only the alphabet

Approach sick days in feedback meeting

How can I find out about the game world without meta-influencing it?

Will users know a CardView is clickable

Why is Skinner so awkward in Hot Fuzz?

Am I being scammed by a sugar daddy?

Purpose of cylindrical attachments on Power Transmission towers

What is the theme of analysis?

What did the 8086 (and 8088) do upon encountering an illegal instruction?

How can this shape perfectly cover a cube?

Arrows inside a commutative diagram using tikzcd

Background for black and white chart

Can an open source licence be revoked if it violates employer's IP?



Pros and cons of writing a book review?


Pros and cons on commenting on public review papers













29















I am a postdoc in a biology department. I am friends with a professor in the philosophy department who is the editor of a Nature journal which publishes book reviews. A 150-page popular science book on biology has just come out and he has asked me to write a 3-page review for it. I would have 6 months to read the book and write the review.



What are the pros and cons of doing this?



An obvious con is that it takes away time from me doing research. There are no obvious pros to me, although it does not seem like much work and it might be 'fun'.



(Wasn't sure what tags to use, if someone has suggestions then please edit.)










share|improve this question
























  • How is a Philosopher writing book reviews in Nature magazine? Isn't Nature about biology and maybe physics?

    – einpoklum
    May 30 at 15:14











  • @einpoklum It is a journal published by the Nature Publishing Group

    – rhombidodecahedron
    May 30 at 15:37















29















I am a postdoc in a biology department. I am friends with a professor in the philosophy department who is the editor of a Nature journal which publishes book reviews. A 150-page popular science book on biology has just come out and he has asked me to write a 3-page review for it. I would have 6 months to read the book and write the review.



What are the pros and cons of doing this?



An obvious con is that it takes away time from me doing research. There are no obvious pros to me, although it does not seem like much work and it might be 'fun'.



(Wasn't sure what tags to use, if someone has suggestions then please edit.)










share|improve this question
























  • How is a Philosopher writing book reviews in Nature magazine? Isn't Nature about biology and maybe physics?

    – einpoklum
    May 30 at 15:14











  • @einpoklum It is a journal published by the Nature Publishing Group

    – rhombidodecahedron
    May 30 at 15:37













29












29








29


2






I am a postdoc in a biology department. I am friends with a professor in the philosophy department who is the editor of a Nature journal which publishes book reviews. A 150-page popular science book on biology has just come out and he has asked me to write a 3-page review for it. I would have 6 months to read the book and write the review.



What are the pros and cons of doing this?



An obvious con is that it takes away time from me doing research. There are no obvious pros to me, although it does not seem like much work and it might be 'fun'.



(Wasn't sure what tags to use, if someone has suggestions then please edit.)










share|improve this question
















I am a postdoc in a biology department. I am friends with a professor in the philosophy department who is the editor of a Nature journal which publishes book reviews. A 150-page popular science book on biology has just come out and he has asked me to write a 3-page review for it. I would have 6 months to read the book and write the review.



What are the pros and cons of doing this?



An obvious con is that it takes away time from me doing research. There are no obvious pros to me, although it does not seem like much work and it might be 'fun'.



(Wasn't sure what tags to use, if someone has suggestions then please edit.)







peer-review books early-career






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jun 2 at 19:19









Tripartio

3,192625




3,192625










asked May 29 at 15:05









rhombidodecahedronrhombidodecahedron

632518




632518












  • How is a Philosopher writing book reviews in Nature magazine? Isn't Nature about biology and maybe physics?

    – einpoklum
    May 30 at 15:14











  • @einpoklum It is a journal published by the Nature Publishing Group

    – rhombidodecahedron
    May 30 at 15:37

















  • How is a Philosopher writing book reviews in Nature magazine? Isn't Nature about biology and maybe physics?

    – einpoklum
    May 30 at 15:14











  • @einpoklum It is a journal published by the Nature Publishing Group

    – rhombidodecahedron
    May 30 at 15:37
















How is a Philosopher writing book reviews in Nature magazine? Isn't Nature about biology and maybe physics?

– einpoklum
May 30 at 15:14





How is a Philosopher writing book reviews in Nature magazine? Isn't Nature about biology and maybe physics?

– einpoklum
May 30 at 15:14













@einpoklum It is a journal published by the Nature Publishing Group

– rhombidodecahedron
May 30 at 15:37





@einpoklum It is a journal published by the Nature Publishing Group

– rhombidodecahedron
May 30 at 15:37










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















48














There are several benefits of writing book reviews for publication:



  1. Develop an understanding of the publications that are out there. Just like how reading academic papers affords you the benefit of being abreast with the latest research, writing book reviews allows you the opportunity to learn more about a field.

  2. Develop a relationship with a journal. Journals need people to write book reviews. It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.

  3. Develop a profile in the academic community. Book reviews are in no way akin to writing an academic article on a research subject. But they can put your name out there and allow you opportunities to become better known to you academic community.

All told book reviews allow your voice to be heard on a subject.






share|improve this answer




















  • 20





    It's also a good way to work on improving your writing.

    – Brian Borchers
    May 29 at 15:40






  • 15





    It's also an advantage to be able to do a friend a favor.

    – henning
    May 30 at 7:08






  • 1





    “It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.” Well you can receive spam requesting more of the same until you die or your e-mail address changes, for one. I wouldn't call that part a relationship, relationships are between humans, not between a human and a database of poor souls who were helpful once.

    – Pascal Cuoq
    May 31 at 19:45



















32














Since Vladhagen only mentions pros, let me list cons also. They may or may not apply to you. Feel free to edit my answer to add more cons.



  1. As you've noted, It takes away time from your research. Moreover, it can also take time away from other important things like preparing for teaching or preparing for meetings, talks etc.
    As some researchers feel the need (or the pressure!) to do the same amount of "real work" (i.e. research) every week regardless of what else they have to do, it could also take away free time and/or time you could spend with your partner, children, friends or hobbies. Especially if you procrastinate and do all the work in the last week. Don't underestimate the amount of work such a review is!


  2. (I assume the review is public, not private.) Depending on the attitudes of the people in your field, you could step on someone's toes: If you write something, some people may not like what you have written, get angry and you could lose reputation with them. Of course, you can also make the authors themselves angry if you write something bad about the book or show some misunderstanding in the review.


  3. If the book is controversial, so will your review be; you can probably not do anything right with the review. I heard about a math research book (in Model Theory, I think) where the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture. I wouldn't want to be a reviewer of this book -- it's hard to do such a review right, especially if the author is much more well-known than you. For a popular science book, scientists often argue about whether a book is "too scientific written" or "too less scientific written".


  4. It can be hard and dull to read a book carefully for a long time, especially if the author does not write too well.


  5. Readers who buy/read the book because of your review **may get angry if they don't share your opinion. So many times I wanted to learn from books where the reviews said they were "didactically well written" only to find out that the reviewer had no idea about didactics and the book was not didactic at all.


  6. You may lack the knowledge about (some of) the topics the authors write about.



  7. People may look at your CV and think of you as unproductive because you "wasted" your time with this review. Unfortunately, those people exist -- on this site, there are even stories about hiring people who see good teaching evaluations as negative! Of course, one could say "those people are stupid, I don't want to work for them anyway" -- in reality, in academia one often does not have so many choices (especially if you are not geographically flexible).

  8. You are make a commitment to complete the review. While most people are hopefully understandable, some people might not like it if you cannot finish your review because of something more important to you which might come up (new position, new partner, new children, sickness). Most likely, reneging is worse than not accepting to do the review.

Of course, some of those points may not apply to you but I found it important to list them all anyway.






share|improve this answer




















  • 7





    What is the name of the book you mentioned ?

    – onurcanbektas
    May 30 at 6:40






  • 1





    The book with the pornographic pictures is the self-published French edition of Bruno Poizat's Groupes Stables. The English translation, published by the American Mathematical Society, omits them. (Poizat is a model theorist, which is probably what user109301 was thinking of; his other well-known book is Cours de théorie des modèles / A Course in Model Theory.)

    – David Richerby
    May 30 at 18:32







  • 6





    "the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture" I'm almost afraid to ask, but what would be related pornographic images to Stable Groups?

    – TripeHound
    May 30 at 21:55






  • 6





    @TripeHound Models engaging in group activities in a stable?

    – Roman Odaisky
    May 30 at 23:53







  • 7





    Writing a review for a controversial book can be a very strong pro instead of, as you say, a con. There are several scientists who are known to the wider public mostly because of their acerbic reviews of controversial books. Yes, this can go either way but it’s definitely not unambiguously negative.

    – Konrad Rudolph
    May 31 at 11:06


















12














One small advantage is that you get a copy of the book "for free" (admittedly not really worth it in terms of the time you'd put into writing the review) ... This is more of an advantage for expensive technical books that you'd like to own.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "415"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f131233%2fpros-and-cons-of-writing-a-book-review%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    48














    There are several benefits of writing book reviews for publication:



    1. Develop an understanding of the publications that are out there. Just like how reading academic papers affords you the benefit of being abreast with the latest research, writing book reviews allows you the opportunity to learn more about a field.

    2. Develop a relationship with a journal. Journals need people to write book reviews. It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.

    3. Develop a profile in the academic community. Book reviews are in no way akin to writing an academic article on a research subject. But they can put your name out there and allow you opportunities to become better known to you academic community.

    All told book reviews allow your voice to be heard on a subject.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 20





      It's also a good way to work on improving your writing.

      – Brian Borchers
      May 29 at 15:40






    • 15





      It's also an advantage to be able to do a friend a favor.

      – henning
      May 30 at 7:08






    • 1





      “It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.” Well you can receive spam requesting more of the same until you die or your e-mail address changes, for one. I wouldn't call that part a relationship, relationships are between humans, not between a human and a database of poor souls who were helpful once.

      – Pascal Cuoq
      May 31 at 19:45
















    48














    There are several benefits of writing book reviews for publication:



    1. Develop an understanding of the publications that are out there. Just like how reading academic papers affords you the benefit of being abreast with the latest research, writing book reviews allows you the opportunity to learn more about a field.

    2. Develop a relationship with a journal. Journals need people to write book reviews. It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.

    3. Develop a profile in the academic community. Book reviews are in no way akin to writing an academic article on a research subject. But they can put your name out there and allow you opportunities to become better known to you academic community.

    All told book reviews allow your voice to be heard on a subject.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 20





      It's also a good way to work on improving your writing.

      – Brian Borchers
      May 29 at 15:40






    • 15





      It's also an advantage to be able to do a friend a favor.

      – henning
      May 30 at 7:08






    • 1





      “It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.” Well you can receive spam requesting more of the same until you die or your e-mail address changes, for one. I wouldn't call that part a relationship, relationships are between humans, not between a human and a database of poor souls who were helpful once.

      – Pascal Cuoq
      May 31 at 19:45














    48












    48








    48







    There are several benefits of writing book reviews for publication:



    1. Develop an understanding of the publications that are out there. Just like how reading academic papers affords you the benefit of being abreast with the latest research, writing book reviews allows you the opportunity to learn more about a field.

    2. Develop a relationship with a journal. Journals need people to write book reviews. It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.

    3. Develop a profile in the academic community. Book reviews are in no way akin to writing an academic article on a research subject. But they can put your name out there and allow you opportunities to become better known to you academic community.

    All told book reviews allow your voice to be heard on a subject.






    share|improve this answer















    There are several benefits of writing book reviews for publication:



    1. Develop an understanding of the publications that are out there. Just like how reading academic papers affords you the benefit of being abreast with the latest research, writing book reviews allows you the opportunity to learn more about a field.

    2. Develop a relationship with a journal. Journals need people to write book reviews. It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.

    3. Develop a profile in the academic community. Book reviews are in no way akin to writing an academic article on a research subject. But they can put your name out there and allow you opportunities to become better known to you academic community.

    All told book reviews allow your voice to be heard on a subject.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited May 29 at 15:38

























    answered May 29 at 15:22









    VladhagenVladhagen

    13.3k74972




    13.3k74972







    • 20





      It's also a good way to work on improving your writing.

      – Brian Borchers
      May 29 at 15:40






    • 15





      It's also an advantage to be able to do a friend a favor.

      – henning
      May 30 at 7:08






    • 1





      “It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.” Well you can receive spam requesting more of the same until you die or your e-mail address changes, for one. I wouldn't call that part a relationship, relationships are between humans, not between a human and a database of poor souls who were helpful once.

      – Pascal Cuoq
      May 31 at 19:45













    • 20





      It's also a good way to work on improving your writing.

      – Brian Borchers
      May 29 at 15:40






    • 15





      It's also an advantage to be able to do a friend a favor.

      – henning
      May 30 at 7:08






    • 1





      “It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.” Well you can receive spam requesting more of the same until you die or your e-mail address changes, for one. I wouldn't call that part a relationship, relationships are between humans, not between a human and a database of poor souls who were helpful once.

      – Pascal Cuoq
      May 31 at 19:45








    20




    20





    It's also a good way to work on improving your writing.

    – Brian Borchers
    May 29 at 15:40





    It's also a good way to work on improving your writing.

    – Brian Borchers
    May 29 at 15:40




    15




    15





    It's also an advantage to be able to do a friend a favor.

    – henning
    May 30 at 7:08





    It's also an advantage to be able to do a friend a favor.

    – henning
    May 30 at 7:08




    1




    1





    “It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.” Well you can receive spam requesting more of the same until you die or your e-mail address changes, for one. I wouldn't call that part a relationship, relationships are between humans, not between a human and a database of poor souls who were helpful once.

    – Pascal Cuoq
    May 31 at 19:45






    “It can never hurt to build a relationship with a journal and its editors.” Well you can receive spam requesting more of the same until you die or your e-mail address changes, for one. I wouldn't call that part a relationship, relationships are between humans, not between a human and a database of poor souls who were helpful once.

    – Pascal Cuoq
    May 31 at 19:45












    32














    Since Vladhagen only mentions pros, let me list cons also. They may or may not apply to you. Feel free to edit my answer to add more cons.



    1. As you've noted, It takes away time from your research. Moreover, it can also take time away from other important things like preparing for teaching or preparing for meetings, talks etc.
      As some researchers feel the need (or the pressure!) to do the same amount of "real work" (i.e. research) every week regardless of what else they have to do, it could also take away free time and/or time you could spend with your partner, children, friends or hobbies. Especially if you procrastinate and do all the work in the last week. Don't underestimate the amount of work such a review is!


    2. (I assume the review is public, not private.) Depending on the attitudes of the people in your field, you could step on someone's toes: If you write something, some people may not like what you have written, get angry and you could lose reputation with them. Of course, you can also make the authors themselves angry if you write something bad about the book or show some misunderstanding in the review.


    3. If the book is controversial, so will your review be; you can probably not do anything right with the review. I heard about a math research book (in Model Theory, I think) where the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture. I wouldn't want to be a reviewer of this book -- it's hard to do such a review right, especially if the author is much more well-known than you. For a popular science book, scientists often argue about whether a book is "too scientific written" or "too less scientific written".


    4. It can be hard and dull to read a book carefully for a long time, especially if the author does not write too well.


    5. Readers who buy/read the book because of your review **may get angry if they don't share your opinion. So many times I wanted to learn from books where the reviews said they were "didactically well written" only to find out that the reviewer had no idea about didactics and the book was not didactic at all.


    6. You may lack the knowledge about (some of) the topics the authors write about.



    7. People may look at your CV and think of you as unproductive because you "wasted" your time with this review. Unfortunately, those people exist -- on this site, there are even stories about hiring people who see good teaching evaluations as negative! Of course, one could say "those people are stupid, I don't want to work for them anyway" -- in reality, in academia one often does not have so many choices (especially if you are not geographically flexible).

    8. You are make a commitment to complete the review. While most people are hopefully understandable, some people might not like it if you cannot finish your review because of something more important to you which might come up (new position, new partner, new children, sickness). Most likely, reneging is worse than not accepting to do the review.

    Of course, some of those points may not apply to you but I found it important to list them all anyway.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 7





      What is the name of the book you mentioned ?

      – onurcanbektas
      May 30 at 6:40






    • 1





      The book with the pornographic pictures is the self-published French edition of Bruno Poizat's Groupes Stables. The English translation, published by the American Mathematical Society, omits them. (Poizat is a model theorist, which is probably what user109301 was thinking of; his other well-known book is Cours de théorie des modèles / A Course in Model Theory.)

      – David Richerby
      May 30 at 18:32







    • 6





      "the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture" I'm almost afraid to ask, but what would be related pornographic images to Stable Groups?

      – TripeHound
      May 30 at 21:55






    • 6





      @TripeHound Models engaging in group activities in a stable?

      – Roman Odaisky
      May 30 at 23:53







    • 7





      Writing a review for a controversial book can be a very strong pro instead of, as you say, a con. There are several scientists who are known to the wider public mostly because of their acerbic reviews of controversial books. Yes, this can go either way but it’s definitely not unambiguously negative.

      – Konrad Rudolph
      May 31 at 11:06















    32














    Since Vladhagen only mentions pros, let me list cons also. They may or may not apply to you. Feel free to edit my answer to add more cons.



    1. As you've noted, It takes away time from your research. Moreover, it can also take time away from other important things like preparing for teaching or preparing for meetings, talks etc.
      As some researchers feel the need (or the pressure!) to do the same amount of "real work" (i.e. research) every week regardless of what else they have to do, it could also take away free time and/or time you could spend with your partner, children, friends or hobbies. Especially if you procrastinate and do all the work in the last week. Don't underestimate the amount of work such a review is!


    2. (I assume the review is public, not private.) Depending on the attitudes of the people in your field, you could step on someone's toes: If you write something, some people may not like what you have written, get angry and you could lose reputation with them. Of course, you can also make the authors themselves angry if you write something bad about the book or show some misunderstanding in the review.


    3. If the book is controversial, so will your review be; you can probably not do anything right with the review. I heard about a math research book (in Model Theory, I think) where the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture. I wouldn't want to be a reviewer of this book -- it's hard to do such a review right, especially if the author is much more well-known than you. For a popular science book, scientists often argue about whether a book is "too scientific written" or "too less scientific written".


    4. It can be hard and dull to read a book carefully for a long time, especially if the author does not write too well.


    5. Readers who buy/read the book because of your review **may get angry if they don't share your opinion. So many times I wanted to learn from books where the reviews said they were "didactically well written" only to find out that the reviewer had no idea about didactics and the book was not didactic at all.


    6. You may lack the knowledge about (some of) the topics the authors write about.



    7. People may look at your CV and think of you as unproductive because you "wasted" your time with this review. Unfortunately, those people exist -- on this site, there are even stories about hiring people who see good teaching evaluations as negative! Of course, one could say "those people are stupid, I don't want to work for them anyway" -- in reality, in academia one often does not have so many choices (especially if you are not geographically flexible).

    8. You are make a commitment to complete the review. While most people are hopefully understandable, some people might not like it if you cannot finish your review because of something more important to you which might come up (new position, new partner, new children, sickness). Most likely, reneging is worse than not accepting to do the review.

    Of course, some of those points may not apply to you but I found it important to list them all anyway.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 7





      What is the name of the book you mentioned ?

      – onurcanbektas
      May 30 at 6:40






    • 1





      The book with the pornographic pictures is the self-published French edition of Bruno Poizat's Groupes Stables. The English translation, published by the American Mathematical Society, omits them. (Poizat is a model theorist, which is probably what user109301 was thinking of; his other well-known book is Cours de théorie des modèles / A Course in Model Theory.)

      – David Richerby
      May 30 at 18:32







    • 6





      "the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture" I'm almost afraid to ask, but what would be related pornographic images to Stable Groups?

      – TripeHound
      May 30 at 21:55






    • 6





      @TripeHound Models engaging in group activities in a stable?

      – Roman Odaisky
      May 30 at 23:53







    • 7





      Writing a review for a controversial book can be a very strong pro instead of, as you say, a con. There are several scientists who are known to the wider public mostly because of their acerbic reviews of controversial books. Yes, this can go either way but it’s definitely not unambiguously negative.

      – Konrad Rudolph
      May 31 at 11:06













    32












    32








    32







    Since Vladhagen only mentions pros, let me list cons also. They may or may not apply to you. Feel free to edit my answer to add more cons.



    1. As you've noted, It takes away time from your research. Moreover, it can also take time away from other important things like preparing for teaching or preparing for meetings, talks etc.
      As some researchers feel the need (or the pressure!) to do the same amount of "real work" (i.e. research) every week regardless of what else they have to do, it could also take away free time and/or time you could spend with your partner, children, friends or hobbies. Especially if you procrastinate and do all the work in the last week. Don't underestimate the amount of work such a review is!


    2. (I assume the review is public, not private.) Depending on the attitudes of the people in your field, you could step on someone's toes: If you write something, some people may not like what you have written, get angry and you could lose reputation with them. Of course, you can also make the authors themselves angry if you write something bad about the book or show some misunderstanding in the review.


    3. If the book is controversial, so will your review be; you can probably not do anything right with the review. I heard about a math research book (in Model Theory, I think) where the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture. I wouldn't want to be a reviewer of this book -- it's hard to do such a review right, especially if the author is much more well-known than you. For a popular science book, scientists often argue about whether a book is "too scientific written" or "too less scientific written".


    4. It can be hard and dull to read a book carefully for a long time, especially if the author does not write too well.


    5. Readers who buy/read the book because of your review **may get angry if they don't share your opinion. So many times I wanted to learn from books where the reviews said they were "didactically well written" only to find out that the reviewer had no idea about didactics and the book was not didactic at all.


    6. You may lack the knowledge about (some of) the topics the authors write about.



    7. People may look at your CV and think of you as unproductive because you "wasted" your time with this review. Unfortunately, those people exist -- on this site, there are even stories about hiring people who see good teaching evaluations as negative! Of course, one could say "those people are stupid, I don't want to work for them anyway" -- in reality, in academia one often does not have so many choices (especially if you are not geographically flexible).

    8. You are make a commitment to complete the review. While most people are hopefully understandable, some people might not like it if you cannot finish your review because of something more important to you which might come up (new position, new partner, new children, sickness). Most likely, reneging is worse than not accepting to do the review.

    Of course, some of those points may not apply to you but I found it important to list them all anyway.






    share|improve this answer















    Since Vladhagen only mentions pros, let me list cons also. They may or may not apply to you. Feel free to edit my answer to add more cons.



    1. As you've noted, It takes away time from your research. Moreover, it can also take time away from other important things like preparing for teaching or preparing for meetings, talks etc.
      As some researchers feel the need (or the pressure!) to do the same amount of "real work" (i.e. research) every week regardless of what else they have to do, it could also take away free time and/or time you could spend with your partner, children, friends or hobbies. Especially if you procrastinate and do all the work in the last week. Don't underestimate the amount of work such a review is!


    2. (I assume the review is public, not private.) Depending on the attitudes of the people in your field, you could step on someone's toes: If you write something, some people may not like what you have written, get angry and you could lose reputation with them. Of course, you can also make the authors themselves angry if you write something bad about the book or show some misunderstanding in the review.


    3. If the book is controversial, so will your review be; you can probably not do anything right with the review. I heard about a math research book (in Model Theory, I think) where the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture. I wouldn't want to be a reviewer of this book -- it's hard to do such a review right, especially if the author is much more well-known than you. For a popular science book, scientists often argue about whether a book is "too scientific written" or "too less scientific written".


    4. It can be hard and dull to read a book carefully for a long time, especially if the author does not write too well.


    5. Readers who buy/read the book because of your review **may get angry if they don't share your opinion. So many times I wanted to learn from books where the reviews said they were "didactically well written" only to find out that the reviewer had no idea about didactics and the book was not didactic at all.


    6. You may lack the knowledge about (some of) the topics the authors write about.



    7. People may look at your CV and think of you as unproductive because you "wasted" your time with this review. Unfortunately, those people exist -- on this site, there are even stories about hiring people who see good teaching evaluations as negative! Of course, one could say "those people are stupid, I don't want to work for them anyway" -- in reality, in academia one often does not have so many choices (especially if you are not geographically flexible).

    8. You are make a commitment to complete the review. While most people are hopefully understandable, some people might not like it if you cannot finish your review because of something more important to you which might come up (new position, new partner, new children, sickness). Most likely, reneging is worse than not accepting to do the review.

    Of course, some of those points may not apply to you but I found it important to list them all anyway.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited May 30 at 15:19









    einpoklum

    26.3k244149




    26.3k244149










    answered May 29 at 17:56









    user109301user109301

    32113




    32113







    • 7





      What is the name of the book you mentioned ?

      – onurcanbektas
      May 30 at 6:40






    • 1





      The book with the pornographic pictures is the self-published French edition of Bruno Poizat's Groupes Stables. The English translation, published by the American Mathematical Society, omits them. (Poizat is a model theorist, which is probably what user109301 was thinking of; his other well-known book is Cours de théorie des modèles / A Course in Model Theory.)

      – David Richerby
      May 30 at 18:32







    • 6





      "the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture" I'm almost afraid to ask, but what would be related pornographic images to Stable Groups?

      – TripeHound
      May 30 at 21:55






    • 6





      @TripeHound Models engaging in group activities in a stable?

      – Roman Odaisky
      May 30 at 23:53







    • 7





      Writing a review for a controversial book can be a very strong pro instead of, as you say, a con. There are several scientists who are known to the wider public mostly because of their acerbic reviews of controversial books. Yes, this can go either way but it’s definitely not unambiguously negative.

      – Konrad Rudolph
      May 31 at 11:06












    • 7





      What is the name of the book you mentioned ?

      – onurcanbektas
      May 30 at 6:40






    • 1





      The book with the pornographic pictures is the self-published French edition of Bruno Poizat's Groupes Stables. The English translation, published by the American Mathematical Society, omits them. (Poizat is a model theorist, which is probably what user109301 was thinking of; his other well-known book is Cours de théorie des modèles / A Course in Model Theory.)

      – David Richerby
      May 30 at 18:32







    • 6





      "the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture" I'm almost afraid to ask, but what would be related pornographic images to Stable Groups?

      – TripeHound
      May 30 at 21:55






    • 6





      @TripeHound Models engaging in group activities in a stable?

      – Roman Odaisky
      May 30 at 23:53







    • 7





      Writing a review for a controversial book can be a very strong pro instead of, as you say, a con. There are several scientists who are known to the wider public mostly because of their acerbic reviews of controversial books. Yes, this can go either way but it’s definitely not unambiguously negative.

      – Konrad Rudolph
      May 31 at 11:06







    7




    7





    What is the name of the book you mentioned ?

    – onurcanbektas
    May 30 at 6:40





    What is the name of the book you mentioned ?

    – onurcanbektas
    May 30 at 6:40




    1




    1





    The book with the pornographic pictures is the self-published French edition of Bruno Poizat's Groupes Stables. The English translation, published by the American Mathematical Society, omits them. (Poizat is a model theorist, which is probably what user109301 was thinking of; his other well-known book is Cours de théorie des modèles / A Course in Model Theory.)

    – David Richerby
    May 30 at 18:32






    The book with the pornographic pictures is the self-published French edition of Bruno Poizat's Groupes Stables. The English translation, published by the American Mathematical Society, omits them. (Poizat is a model theorist, which is probably what user109301 was thinking of; his other well-known book is Cours de théorie des modèles / A Course in Model Theory.)

    – David Richerby
    May 30 at 18:32





    6




    6





    "the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture" I'm almost afraid to ask, but what would be related pornographic images to Stable Groups?

    – TripeHound
    May 30 at 21:55





    "the author inserted in every chapter a (unrelated) pornographic/sexual picture" I'm almost afraid to ask, but what would be related pornographic images to Stable Groups?

    – TripeHound
    May 30 at 21:55




    6




    6





    @TripeHound Models engaging in group activities in a stable?

    – Roman Odaisky
    May 30 at 23:53






    @TripeHound Models engaging in group activities in a stable?

    – Roman Odaisky
    May 30 at 23:53





    7




    7





    Writing a review for a controversial book can be a very strong pro instead of, as you say, a con. There are several scientists who are known to the wider public mostly because of their acerbic reviews of controversial books. Yes, this can go either way but it’s definitely not unambiguously negative.

    – Konrad Rudolph
    May 31 at 11:06





    Writing a review for a controversial book can be a very strong pro instead of, as you say, a con. There are several scientists who are known to the wider public mostly because of their acerbic reviews of controversial books. Yes, this can go either way but it’s definitely not unambiguously negative.

    – Konrad Rudolph
    May 31 at 11:06











    12














    One small advantage is that you get a copy of the book "for free" (admittedly not really worth it in terms of the time you'd put into writing the review) ... This is more of an advantage for expensive technical books that you'd like to own.






    share|improve this answer



























      12














      One small advantage is that you get a copy of the book "for free" (admittedly not really worth it in terms of the time you'd put into writing the review) ... This is more of an advantage for expensive technical books that you'd like to own.






      share|improve this answer

























        12












        12








        12







        One small advantage is that you get a copy of the book "for free" (admittedly not really worth it in terms of the time you'd put into writing the review) ... This is more of an advantage for expensive technical books that you'd like to own.






        share|improve this answer













        One small advantage is that you get a copy of the book "for free" (admittedly not really worth it in terms of the time you'd put into writing the review) ... This is more of an advantage for expensive technical books that you'd like to own.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered May 30 at 0:32









        Ben BolkerBen Bolker

        380211




        380211



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f131233%2fpros-and-cons-of-writing-a-book-review%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Club Baloncesto Breogán Índice Historia | Pavillón | Nome | O Breogán na cultura popular | Xogadores | Adestradores | Presidentes | Palmarés | Historial | Líderes | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegacióncbbreogan.galCadroGuía oficial da ACB 2009-10, páxina 201Guía oficial ACB 1992, páxina 183. Editorial DB.É de 6.500 espectadores sentados axeitándose á última normativa"Estudiantes Junior, entre as mellores canteiras"o orixinalHemeroteca El Mundo Deportivo, 16 setembro de 1970, páxina 12Historia do BreogánAlfredo Pérez, o último canoneiroHistoria C.B. BreogánHemeroteca de El Mundo DeportivoJimmy Wright, norteamericano do Breogán deixará Lugo por ameazas de morteResultados de Breogán en 1986-87Resultados de Breogán en 1990-91Ficha de Velimir Perasović en acb.comResultados de Breogán en 1994-95Breogán arrasa al Barça. "El Mundo Deportivo", 27 de setembro de 1999, páxina 58CB Breogán - FC BarcelonaA FEB invita a participar nunha nova Liga EuropeaCharlie Bell na prensa estatalMáximos anotadores 2005Tempada 2005-06 : Tódolos Xogadores da Xornada""Non quero pensar nunha man negra, mais pregúntome que está a pasar""o orixinalRaúl López, orgulloso dos xogadores, presume da boa saúde económica do BreogánJulio González confirma que cesa como presidente del BreogánHomenaxe a Lisardo GómezA tempada do rexurdimento celesteEntrevista a Lisardo GómezEl COB dinamita el Pazo para forzar el quinto (69-73)Cafés Candelas, patrocinador del CB Breogán"Suso Lázare, novo presidente do Breogán"o orixinalCafés Candelas Breogán firma el mayor triunfo de la historiaEl Breogán realizará 17 homenajes por su cincuenta aniversario"O Breogán honra ao seu fundador e primeiro presidente"o orixinalMiguel Giao recibiu a homenaxe do PazoHomenaxe aos primeiros gladiadores celestesO home que nos amosa como ver o Breo co corazónTita Franco será homenaxeada polos #50anosdeBreoJulio Vila recibirá unha homenaxe in memoriam polos #50anosdeBreo"O Breogán homenaxeará aos seus aboados máis veteráns"Pechada ovación a «Capi» Sanmartín e Ricardo «Corazón de González»Homenaxe por décadas de informaciónPaco García volve ao Pazo con motivo do 50 aniversario"Resultados y clasificaciones""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, campión da Copa Princesa""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, equipo ACB"C.B. Breogán"Proxecto social"o orixinal"Centros asociados"o orixinalFicha en imdb.comMario Camus trata la recuperación del amor en 'La vieja música', su última película"Páxina web oficial""Club Baloncesto Breogán""C. B. Breogán S.A.D."eehttp://www.fegaba.com

            Vilaño, A Laracha Índice Patrimonio | Lugares e parroquias | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación43°14′52″N 8°36′03″O / 43.24775, -8.60070

            Cegueira Índice Epidemioloxía | Deficiencia visual | Tipos de cegueira | Principais causas de cegueira | Tratamento | Técnicas de adaptación e axudas | Vida dos cegos | Primeiros auxilios | Crenzas respecto das persoas cegas | Crenzas das persoas cegas | O neno deficiente visual | Aspectos psicolóxicos da cegueira | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación54.054.154.436928256blindnessDicionario da Real Academia GalegaPortal das Palabras"International Standards: Visual Standards — Aspects and Ranges of Vision Loss with Emphasis on Population Surveys.""Visual impairment and blindness""Presentan un plan para previr a cegueira"o orixinalACCDV Associació Catalana de Cecs i Disminuïts Visuals - PMFTrachoma"Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber's congenital amaurosis"1844137110.1056/NEJMoa0802268Cans guía - os mellores amigos dos cegosArquivadoEscola de cans guía para cegos en Mortágua, PortugalArquivado"Tecnología para ciegos y deficientes visuales. Recopilación de recursos gratuitos en la Red""Colorino""‘COL.diesis’, escuchar los sonidos del color""COL.diesis: Transforming Colour into Melody and Implementing the Result in a Colour Sensor Device"o orixinal"Sistema de desarrollo de sinestesia color-sonido para invidentes utilizando un protocolo de audio""Enseñanza táctil - geometría y color. Juegos didácticos para niños ciegos y videntes""Sistema Constanz"L'ocupació laboral dels cecs a l'Estat espanyol està pràcticament equiparada a la de les persones amb visió, entrevista amb Pedro ZuritaONCE (Organización Nacional de Cegos de España)Prevención da cegueiraDescrición de deficiencias visuais (Disc@pnet)Braillín, un boneco atractivo para calquera neno, con ou sen discapacidade, que permite familiarizarse co sistema de escritura e lectura brailleAxudas Técnicas36838ID00897494007150-90057129528256DOID:1432HP:0000618D001766C10.597.751.941.162C97109C0155020