Greetings, this is Emily. Welcome to this unit-edit video.
What process does a peer reviewer use to conduct a review?
Each peer reviewer follows a slightly different method for conducting a peer
review. Judith reads and makes notes about what needs to be improved on the
manuscript as she goes through it, and she might correct inaccuracies. She
usually works at a publishing company but sometimes prints a hard copy to read
on her commute. She typically completes a peer review within two to four hours.
When Sarah receives a paper, she usually reads through a printed copy, making
notes as she goes. Once she's read it and has a good idea of what she wants to say
about it, she either completes the online form or compiles a Word document with
comments questions and suggestions to submit online.
Geraldine follows a similar process to Sarah and reads a printed copy of the
paper thoroughly which she annotates with extensive comments and notes as she
is reading it. She usually leaves it for a day or two,
so that she can think about the paper and her comments before writing the
review and submitting it electronically.
Stephen takes a seemingly more thorough approach than the other three peer
reviewers. Upon receiving the submission, he usually prints out a hard copy to
read through the first time as if he were not reviewing it to get an overall
sense of the ideas in the topic and of the clarity with which the author or
authors communicate. He then reviews the reference section and skims through to
see whether the author has included important scholars within their area of
interest. "If not, I make a mental note as this will require justification
within." He then reads a submission for a second
time on his office computer, and he makes comments and tracks changes throughout.
After leaving the submission for a day or two, Stephen reads it a third time
checking over his comments as he goes, and then he begins writing his response
based on his comments including his recommendations. Finally, he reviews his
response to the author or authors to ensure his tone is respectful and that
his overall feedback is useful and potentially productive. Stephen usually
spends two full days cumulatively over three or four days total on each review
Do peer reviewers do extra background reading? I asked the peer reviewers about
whether they do any additional reading to understand the content of the paper.
All four peer reviewers replied that it is rare for them to do extra reading
while performing a peer review because if they're reviewing a paper it is
usually because they have some expertise in the topic area. However, Stephen stated
if the author authors cite a study with which I'm not familiar, I will find the
article to ensure it supports the point being made. Additionally, if the author
relies heavily on one or a few articles Stephen will read them thoroughly.
Geraldine agreed that it might be necessary to read one or two extra
papers to assist in writing the review.
Peer reviewers are blind despite there being several peer reviewers for each
paper the reviews are conducted blindly, meaning the peer reviewers are not told
the identities of the authors or the other peer reviewers, and they're thus
unable to collaborate with the other peer reviewers. When conducting the
review, however, it is possible that peer reviewers could be aware of who the
authors are if the community of authors is small, if they have heard about the
research through a grapevine, or if they know the author's style of writing. While
there is a concern that this would affect bias, a study in 2013 affirmed
that acquaintances can be just as brutal with reviews as anyone else.
Submitting a report to the journal once the peer reviewers have completed their
review. They're asked to provide a report to the journal editor which typically
takes the form of a detailed structured report under a number of specific
headings with the main narrative review sometimes several pages long being the
primary focus. Additional comments that are not visible to the author or authors
are usually forwarded to the journal editor and sometimes peer reviewers are
required to rate the submission on various criteria on a given score sheet.
The peer reviewers are generally required to complete a web-based form on
an academic journal interface designed specifically for the process of
submitting and reviewing papers such as ScholarOne manuscript or Manuscript
Central. These interfaces allow accompanying files to be uploaded. For
example, a word document that includes detailed comments. However, some journals
still conduct the process via email which is clearly less efficient, and
different systems require different things. For example, some ask for an
evaluation on a number of key criteria using a scale and for qualitative
feedback while others ask for qualitative feedback on a series of
questions about such things as academic contribution, knowledge of the literature,
quality of the methodology (if relevant), quality of the findings, and the quality
of the writing. Overall, peer reviewers are typically asked to report on the
appropriateness of the methods and statistical analysis that have been used
and the thoroughness of the literature review the quality of the writing and
the flow of the arguments in the paper. Therefore, the quality of the English is
not something peer reviewers are generally required to report on. However,
if they feel there is an issue with the English, they are expected to comment on
it. Once again, this is Emily from uni-edit.
We hope you enjoyed this tip. Have a wonderful day!