I am currently waiting for peer reviews of two books I've worked on: one sole-authored, one co-authored. We don't talk much about the experience of waiting for reviews, and it's not something that appears to have been researched. Yet it's something everyone doing academic work has to go through and it may be bad for our mental health. I'm finding it particularly difficult at the moment because a lot rides on these reviews. The sole-authored book, which is on a contentious topic, has already had one set of reviews. Reviewer 1 was utterly damning, saying "I couldn't find anything to praise". Luckily, Reviewers 2 and 3 were more measured, offering both praise and constructive criticism, and their input helped me to revise and strengthen the typescript. However, in the process, my editor and I realised that we needed further reviews from people with a particular kind of specialist knowledge. My editor approached around ten potential reviewers, but only one agreed to do the job. So I'm gibbering what if that person agrees with Reviewer 1? The co-authored book is in a contentious format. My co-authors and I decided that I would be the person to liaise with publishers, as I have form in this process. The last time I liaised with academic publishers for a co-authored book was in the early 2000s, and I'd forgotten how heavily responsible it makes me feel. Fortunately, I've found a publisher that is interested and has sent the book out for reviews, to two professional academics and two students. This is great and terrifying but at least there are four reviewers. Even so, what if they all think it's rubbish? In many ways I love the peer review system. I welcome feedback on my writing, and I'm not at all averse to constructive criticism. I am by no means arrogant enough to think I can write a good book without input from others. Yet peer review, as a process, is fraught with uncertainty. Comments may not be constructive, or may not come at all. They may be positive, or negative, or in between, or a mixture. How long has it been since the author liaised with academic publishers? A. it was five years ago B. not enough information C. almost 20 years D. it was a year ago
C

Yes. 20 years ago. When I was a lot younger. I was victimised by a gang of bent police men, who arrested me and set me up to get charged with something that I did not do which I believe was connected to other criminals who live in my area, who I believe were connected to a gang of DJ's who were involved stealing intellectual and copyright works from me (likely their party organisers and drug dealer buddies). I was sent to court and found guilty based on no evidence by a magistrate court judge who was later struck off for corruption after defrauding an old lady of over a million pounds! I was not put in prison for this minor offense but did receive a minor criminal record. This criminal records the same DJ's and bent ex-police have used to ruin my reputation and career. One of the bent policemen, who incidentally had already been thrown out of the police force for car insurance fraud, even turned up at the uni I went to and spread vicious slander to ruin me there, and in the area that I lived at the time. I was then victimised by the people at the famous college that I went to and all my intellectual and copyright works stolen. Which I note, generated millions for others. Once they made their money and gained credibility on the back of my hard work, innovation and some may say genius, the thieves then did all they could to ruin my reputation in the entertainment industry and in the area that I live. Making my life extremely hard for no more reason than having my work stolen. If I wasn't so tough, and for a few people left who have at least some integrity, I would be dead now, like the rest of their victims. I have lost respect for quite a few people who I used to think were really talented. I now understand where there talent comes from Shame on them. Why was the author upset about the arrest? A. the author hurt someone B. not enough information C. the author was not guilty D. the author was guilty of a smaller crime
C

Q: Not as a nurse, but as a patient. I had my appendix removed in about 1970 before keyhole surgery and the surgeon had not properly stitched the inside incision. This meant I was slowly "leaking" blood into the area between my abdominal cavity lining and my skin. I was kept in the hospital for two weeks and every day the same nurse would come along and open the end of the incision in my skin to relieve the pressure caused by the pooling of my blood. That was fine for the first five days, but the weekend came and she was off duty. Apparently, nobody else knew what to do. By Monday morning, I was in agony and when she arrived, she was appalled I had not been drained during the weekend. The other thing that happened during the weekend was the end of the skin incision, which she had opened, had mostly healed meaning there was no convenient hole for the blood to be drained. The nurse used a sharp pair of scissors to reopen one end of the partly-healed incision, but still the blood would not simply drain of its own accord. She used both hands to squeeze downwards onto the swollen blood reservoir. At first, there was no reaction except agonizing pain, but after a few seconds and a very hard squeeze, the stinking, coagulated blood jetted out of the hole she'd made squirting across the ceiling, down the wall and down her full-length coating her face and the front of her uniform. Despite the pain, I couldn't keep myself from laughing loud and long. She then dressed the wound, directed some junior nurses to clean the ceiling and the wall while she went to clean herself. I apologized for laughing the following day when she returned. She told me she appreciated the humor of the situation so there was no "hard feelings." The patient thinks that A. the pain was not bad B. the junior nurses are sorry C. the nurse has a good sense of humor D. not enough information
A: C

(Q).
Just minutes after Donald Trump fired Rex Tillerson on Tuesday, the president was blunt about his long-standing differences with his former secretary of state. "We disagreed on things," Trump told reporters outside the White House, specifically pointing to friction over the Iran nuclear agreement. "I wanted to either break it or do something, and he felt a little bit differently," Trump said. "We were really not thinking the same." Trump reportedly had considered firing Tillerson for months. But the decision - and the abrupt way it was executed - represents a dramatic end to a strained relationship. Tillerson learned of his firing by an early-morning Trump tweet, according to Steve Goldstein, undersecretary of state. White House officials disputed that notion, and promptly fired Goldstein. The move left some of Trump's staunchest defenders with mixed feelings. "It's all very Trumpian," said James Carafano of the conservative Heritage Foundation, who helped staff the State Department as a member of Trump's transition team. "When the president makes changes, he just abruptly makes them." During his 14 months at the State Department, Tillerson had numerous policy differences with Trump - and the friction frequently played out in public. The animosity peaked in October, when news surfaced that Tillerson reportedly called Trump a "moron" following a July Pentagon meeting. Tillerson never explicitly denied the account. Tillerson also publicly disagreed with Trump's decision to pull out of the Paris climate accord. He reportedly opposed Trump's decision to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. And Tillerson sometimes took a tougher stance than Trump on Russia including this week, when he blamed Moscow for a suspected nerve agent attack in Britain. In return, Trump on numerous occasions publicly undermined his top diplomat, including in October when he tweeted Tillerson was "wasting his time" trying to negotiate with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. When Trump ultimately made his decision last week to... Why did Trump fire Tillerson ? A. not enough information B. They disagreed on many issues C. He insulted him D. His work was not good enough
(A).
B