Changes

Sternberg's interpretation of the guidelines for review and publication were different, based on the actual procedures used in the publication of articles during his association with the Council.  Instead of assigning the review process to an Associate Editor as was normally, but not always, the case, he assigned the review to himself based on his expertise in different aspects of evolutionary biology.<ref>[http://www.rsternberg.net/publication_details.htm#Process] Publication process for the Meyer paper</ref>

Sternberg's interpretation of the guidelines for review and publication were different, based on the actual procedures used in the publication of articles during his association with the Council.  Instead of assigning the review process to an Associate Editor as was normally, but not always, the case, he assigned the review to himself based on his expertise in different aspects of evolutionary biology.<ref>[http://www.rsternberg.net/publication_details.htm#Process] Publication process for the Meyer paper</ref>

Sternberg has stated that he reviewed the article with a colleague who is a scientist at the National Museum of Natural History and a member of the Council, and was encouraged to continue the review process.  He then "sent the paper out for review to four experts. Three reviewers responded and were willing to review the paper; all are experts in relevant aspects of evolutionary and molecular biology and hold full-time faculty positions in major research institutions, one at an Ivy League university, another at a major North American public university, a third on a well-known overseas research faculty."<ref>[http://www.rsternberg.net/publication_details.htm#Process] Publication process for the Meyer paper</ref>  Sternberg will not disclose the names of these individuals, which has led critics to make accusations that he hand-picked these reviewers for a pro-ID bias, despite Sternberg stating that they did not necessarily agree with the paper's author's arguments or conclusions.<ref>[http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html] Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington</ref>

Sternberg has stated that he reviewed the article with a colleague who is a scientist at the National Museum of Natural History and a member of the Council, and was encouraged to continue the review process.  He then "sent the paper out for review to four experts. Three reviewers responded and were willing to review the paper; all are experts in relevant aspects of evolutionary and molecular biology and hold full-time faculty positions in major research institutions, one at an Ivy League university, another at a major North American public university, a third on a well-known overseas research faculty."<ref>[http://www.rsternberg.net/publication_details.htm#Process] Publication process for the Meyer paper</ref>  In line with normal practice,<ref>http://www.rsternberg.net/OSC_ltr.htm</ref> Sternberg will not disclose the names of these individuals, which has led critics to make accusations that he hand-picked these reviewers for a pro-ID bias, despite Sternberg stating that they did not necessarily agree with the paper's author's arguments or conclusions.<ref>[http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html] Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington</ref>

== References ==

== References ==