What is peer review?

Peer review is a quality assurance process in academia and scientific research that acts to ensure the validity and credibility of scholarly work. It involves the evaluation of a research manuscript, article, or proposal by experts in the field before it is accepted and published. This article gives a general overview of the peer review process and what you can expect as a researcher when submitting your manuscript.

What is peer review?

Peer review is a process in which a research paper or other empirical work that has been submitted to academic journals is reviewed by experts, or “peers,” in the field. Peer review happens when these experts carefully review and provide feedback on the submitted manuscript prior to its acceptance in an academic journal or conference.

Peer review is the main way through which research papers get disseminated for a wider audience. In many ways, peer reviewers serve as “gatekeepers” to what knowledge can become disseminated to the public because they help determine whether an article gets accepted or rejected for publication. They act as a filter through which research must pass before reaching a wider audience.

Why is peer review important?

Peer review is crucial because it ensures that articles adhere to the required standards of quality and rigor in their respective fields. It also verifies that the research has been conducted using reliable methods, helping to prevent the publication of flawed or misleading articles.

Peer review also plays a significant role in identifying weaknesses or problems in the submitted manuscript. This process is vital because it enhances the overall quality of the article, making it more robust and reliable.

In addition, peer review offers valuable opportunities to acquire essential skills for academia, including critical thinking, writing, and editing. Through receiving feedback from fellow researchers, you can learn how to provide, consider, and respond to constructive criticism. Moreover, staying engaged in peer review allows researchers to stay informed about the latest developments in their field and stay up to date with the current literature.

How does peer review work?

Screening

The first step of peer review is the initial screening stage where a member of the editorial staff of the journal takes a first look at the article and determine if it should be accepted, rejected, or sent for peer review. Articles at this stage can be automatically rejected for not being within the scope of the journal or for not applying journal’s guidelines. Rarely, articles are immediately accepted into the journal. Typically, the managing editor decides to send the paper out for peer review.

Under review

If it is sent for peer review, the editor will assign several reviewers who are in the same area as the topic of the paper. Usually, two peer reviewers are needed for  peer review.  

During the peer review stage, the reviewers will carefully read, evaluate, and critique the submission. They will assess the article for logical flow, soundness of methods, rigor of analyses, novelty of the contribution, and validity of the conclusions. Factors like clarity of writing and readability also come into play. 

Typically, reviewers have a time limit of 2-8 weeks to review the paper. Then, they provide detailed feedback on the manuscript back to the editor, including areas for improvement. 

They also recommend whether the article should be: accepted, meaning published in the journal; rejected, meaning not eligible for publication in that journal; or accepted with minor or major revisions.

Revisions

Once the editor receives the reviewers’ feedback, the assigned editor or sometimes the editor-in-chief, make the final decision whether to accept or reject the article based on the reviewer’s comments and the quality of the article. 

At this point, the editor can  request revisions. This means that the article is sent back to the authors with some changes to make. The editor can request major or minor revisions depending on reviewer comments and his assessment. Minor revisions imply that the article needs several changes to make it quality for publication, whereas major revisions are more substantial changes. 

If the article is accepted pending revision, the article is sent back to the authors with the comments from reviewers. The authors then have a specified amount of time to make the changes. The amount of time authors have to implement the changes varies depending on the journal. Once the authors revise their manuscript, the article is sent back to the journal and the editor again decides whether to accept, reject, or request more revisions. 

Sometimes, articles undergoes several rounds of revisions before the final decision is made.

Types of peer review

There are several different types of peer review. Generally, peer review may be editorial (in-house) or external with invited reviewers, who may be previous authors of that journal. The most common types  are outlined below. 

• Single-blind review: In this type of review, the reviewers know who the submitting author is, but the authors don’t know the identity of the reviewers. This type of review aims to reduce biases.

• Double-blind review: In this type of review, neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other’s identity. This is considered the gold standard in peer review because it minimizes the risk of bias from both sides. 

• Open review: The opposite of a double-blind review, open review is where both the authors and reviewers know each other’s identities. Here, the review process is conducted openly and transparently. This makes it accessible for readers, which puts more responsibility on the authors since errors are visible to all.

• Pre-Publication Peer Review: Occurs before an article is published. It involves a thorough evaluation by experts in the field to ensure the quality, validity, and significance of the research.

• Collaborative Peer Review: Collaborative peer review is a more interactive and iterative process, where reviewers and authors engage in a dialogue to improve the quality of the manuscript. This approach focuses on constructive feedback and encourages ongoing revisions.

• Single-Review or Editorial Review: Some journals may use a single-review or editorial review process, where a single editor or reviewer assesses the manuscript and makes the decision on publication. This type of review is typically faster but may have limitations in terms of thoroughness.

The type of peer review articles undergo depends on the journal you submit to. Check your journal’s guidelines on the type of review they offer.

How long does peer review take?

Peer review can take anywhere from a few weeks to several months or even years, with an average time of roughly 17 weeks. The duration of peer review can vary depending on multiple factors, such as the complexity of the research, the number of revisions required, the availability of peer reviewers, and the scientific field.

For example, data collected and analyzed from 3500 review experiences found that the shortest review durations, around 12-14 weeks, are observed in Medicine, Public Health, and the Natural Sciences, while Economics and Business have the longest process, averaging around 25 weeks. Mathematics, Computer Sciences, Social Sciences, and Humanities also experience relatively extended review periods of approximately 22-23 weeks.

 Takeaways

Peer review is an essential part of academic publishing where articles undergo critique and assessment by experts in the scientific community. The most common types of peer review are single-blind, double-blind, or open review, and the type of peer review offered will depend on the journal you’re submitting to. If an article is sent out for peer review, it can take several weeks to a few months before a decision is made, followed by several more months if revisions are required.