What Is Peer Review? 

Having experts within your field evaluate your work before publication is more than a formality; it's essential. Peer review is an iterative, adversarial process in which a research publication is evaluated for quality. Many aspects are considered, including the premise of the research, evidentiary support, novelty, impact or applicability, and communication quality. Peer review is designed to ensure that the researchers’ point is proven in their article and that potential gaps in the work have been managed or can be explained. 

According to Elsevier, "Peer review helps validate research, establish a method by which it can be evaluated, and increase networking possibilities within research communities." Peer-reviewed articles are used in education, for future research, in professional practice, to develop regulations, and to set policy, so it's important that they be accurate. 

Peer review, as we recognize it today, has existed formally for centuries. The first known pre-publication peer review occurred in 1665 in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. In the 1700s, a medical journal (Medical Essays and Observations) began reviewing articles prior to publication and may have been the first peer-reviewed process; the system they developed is similar in many ways to the one we use presently. External review, however, did not become commonplace until the middle of the 20th century (BioTechniques 2015).   

There are many types of peer review currently, but the most common are single anonymized, in which reviewers are unknown to the authors; double anonymized, in which authors and reviewers are unknown to each other; and open reviews, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are known. Anonymized reviews are meant to eliminate any possible bias, while open reviews are meant to encourage meaningful author–reviewer feedback. 

A less common approach is post-publication review, in which an article is published and then subjected to review by its readers. Although this type of peer review is rare, it opens the process to the broader scientific community instead of two or three referees chosen by a journal. 

Regardless of method, peer review is meant to ensure that valid, significant, and original work is given a fair chance at publication. 

What is the peer review process? 

The peer review process involves an exchange between the journal editor and a team of reviewers—referees who are experts in your field. The reviewers read your article to evaluate its scientific validity, originality, and research significance before making one of the following recommendations: 

• Unconditional acceptance: No changes are required before publication. 

• Conditional acceptance (revisions required): Minor or major revisions are necessary before publication. 

• Conditional rejection: The journal will reconsider publishing the article only after it is revised and resubmitted for additional peer review. 

• Outright rejection: The journal will not publish the article, even after substantial revisions. 

If you've already submitted your article to a journal and it's been accepted unconditionally, that's fantastic—and quite rare. The best you can usually hope for is conditional acceptance. However, many academics face the reality of rejection. Rejection isn’t a value judgment about the researchers or necessarily the research work itself. Rather, rejection means, essentially, that the article simply isn’t ready for print. 

Once you've received your referee reports, knowing how to respond can make all the difference.  

See our guide on how to respond to referee reports

Peer review, of course, has its flaws. A major flaw involves anonymization; often, it’s possible for reviewers and authors to identify one another through various (and sometimes unavoidable) clues, such as writing style, the citations they suggest, or their research program. 

A second significant flaw is the use of the peer review process to boost a journal’s impact factor or obtain additional citations. Reviewers sometimes suggest that authors cite publications from the target journal (which may or may not be ideally suited to the study under consideration) or a colleague. While suggesting an article from one of these sources is often done honestly, suggesting them improperly undermines the peer review process. 

Conclusion 

As the UK charity Sense about Science puts it, "Peer review is an essential dividing line for judging what is scientific and what is speculation and opinion." Whatever its flaws and inefficiencies, it is a necessary part of scientific communication and the research process. 

Just as it sometimes takes a fresh set of eyes and an unbiased opinion to fully assess the quality of your research, polishing your writing is often best done by someone with an outsider’s perspective. That's why it's a good idea to use a professional editing service, such as Scribendi, to prepare your article before initial submission and to help you through the process of responding to your reviewers. 

Get expert support for your peer review response

Are you working on a response to journal reviewers? Our experts can provide a point-by-point review of your text, as well as edited versions of your manuscript and response letter, to ensure that you’ve fully addressed your reviewers' comments—and help get your paper accepted faster.