You are here

Read this page in English | Read this page in Simplified Chinese

Purpose of Peer Review

It is widely accepted that Peer Review is the most valid form of research evaluation and it is a cornerstone of the process of bringing academic research to publication in the following ways:

  • Evaluation – Peer review is an effective form of research evaluation to help select the highest quality articles for publication.
  • Integrity – Peer review ensures the integrity of the publishing process and the scholarly record. Reviewers are independent of journal publications and the research being conducted.
  • Quality – The filtering process and revision advice improve the quality of the final research article as well as offering the author new insights into their research methods and the results that they have compiled. Peer review gives authors access to the opinions of experts in the field who can provide support and insight.

Types of peer review

  • Single blind peer review – the name of the reviewer is hidden from the author.
  • Double blind peer review – names are hidden from both reviewers and the authors.
  • Open peer review – everyone is identified.
  • Post publication peer review is growing in popularity in some fields and can offer useful interaction and discussion forum for the research community. This form of peer review is not usual or appropriate in all fields.

Please double check the manuscript submission guidelines of the journal you are reviewing in order to ensure that you understand the method of peer review being used.

Invitations to Review

Referees are sent invitations to review papers by journal editors. Most will either make requests by email or using an online submission and review system. We understand that our reviewers are busy so it won’t always be possible for invitations to be accepted. If you are asked to provide a review, in order to avoid delays, we would be grateful if you could let us know as soon as possible if you are unable to complete it at the time or if a problem arises after the invitation has been accepted. Suggestions for alternative reviewers are always gratefully received!