• Balthazar@lemmy.world
    14·
    10 days ago

    I wonder if there’s a common author or two in those references that would serve to identify the anonymous reviewers.

  • ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world
    6·
    10 days ago

    i am unable to understand how that works; please help.

    if these are indeed references to assertions made in their paper, how can they be irrelevant?

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      10·
      10 days ago

      Pretty sure the request was “get more references” to a paper that needed none. So they added a bunch of stuff that doesn’t do shit but gets the “number” bigger so the reviewers are happy with a “contribution” they made.

      • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
        15·
        10 days ago

        More likely it was “please cite these tangentially related papers from the same field but not actually related to this work, which were totally not written by me, your anonymous reviewer, (who was picked because of my activity in this research area), and I’m definitely not suggesting them to drive my citation count up, no siree.”