universidade federal de santa catarina pós-graduação em letras ...

80manifestation of agreement (1), a sort of power relationship that can be establishedamong members that support a certain approach to the discipline (2), or still a socialnorm and power relationship among peers of maintaining a closely linked ring ofexponential members who control and orient the disciplinary debate (3). The picture thatis drawn of chemistry is that of a tightly woven disciplinary matrix where editors contactexpert members and ask them for ‘personal favors’.C, however, also emphasizes the ‘scientific responsibility’ that academics haveand that are observed through book reviewing practices:[C]...anyone who writes a book wants it to receive an appropriate review, thereforeone should have scientific responsibility. Some people are responsible in thatsense. Somebody has got to do it.Still less noble reasons were recalled such as to get a book for free or just to killtime while waiting to get published in a more prestigious section of the journal:[L]Reviewers do it to stay active in the field, to get a free book, to publishsomething while finishing a paper to submit, or out of professional duty,although the value that a university/college will give to a published review maydepend on the institution.[C]Professional duty or individualistic aims. It is not that by writing a review youget started in the academic scene, but it is basically what it does for the reviewer,increasing your awareness and understanding of the subject. To get a free copyof the book. To make own opinion public. Especially if it differs from that in thebook.