{"id":88,"date":"2019-09-16T14:12:14","date_gmt":"2019-09-16T13:12:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/researchmatters\/?p=88"},"modified":"2019-09-17T12:48:59","modified_gmt":"2019-09-17T11:48:59","slug":"peer-review-week-2019-quality-in-peer-review","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/researchmatters\/2019\/09\/16\/peer-review-week-2019-quality-in-peer-review\/","title":{"rendered":"Peer Review Week 2019: Quality in Peer Review"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"A<\/a>
From http:\/\/www.lab-initio.com\/images\/fullsize\/nz060.jpg<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

When I started writing this blog post I titled it \u201cPeer review: the good, the bad and the ugly\u201d. Then I googled \u201cpeer review\u201d and found that was not a clever or original title (see here<\/a> and here<\/a> for starters), and certainly wouldn\u2019t get past Reviewer 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Peer review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent researchers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in their journal.” https:\/\/www.biomedcentral.com\/getpublished\/peer-review-process <\/em><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\"Logo<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Peer Review Week<\/a> (a global event celebrating the vital role peer review plays in maintaining scientific quality) has a focus on quality in 2019: how can you, the research community, provide and be provided with quality peer review? <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The goals of peer review are both lofty and mundane. It is the responsibility of journals to administer an effective review system. Peer review is designed to select technically valid research of significant interest. Referees are expected to identify flaws, suggest improvements and assess novelty. If the manuscript is deemed important enough to be published in a high visibility journal, referees ensure that it is internally consistent, thereby ferreting out spurious conclusions or clumsy frauds.” www.nature.com\/nature-research\/editorial-policies\/peer-review<\/em><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

How do you know if you are reviewing well? There are some great resources written by researchers and publishers including Notes for Those New to Writing Peer Reviews<\/a>, How to write a structured reviewer report<\/a> and the hashtag #BeReviewer1<\/a> on Twitter. There is also plenty of information on how NOT to peer review well \u2013 see the hashtag #Reviewer2<\/a> on Twitter, or The Three Types of Peer Reviewers<\/a>. It is always worth reading the peer review policy of key journals in your field, both so you know what to expect when you submit a paper and so you know what is expected from you as a peer reviewer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The review by peers is a tried and tested method \u2026. it places great demands on reviewers whose assessments must be honest, fair, safe and independent.” https:\/\/publons.com\/community\/academy\/<\/em><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What makes a good reviewer?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n