Manuscript Review: What's Exactly? Cognizant Yourself with How Why and When + Pros and Cons of Reviewing !

Abstract:

Peer review involves assessment of the importance of the research question, the originality of the work, its strengths and weaknesses, data analysis and interpretation, and the presentation of the information. The work should be evaluated comprehensively in terms of its content, methodology, and ethics.

Peer review is an integral part of the publication process for all academics in the molecular life sciences and beyond. You may groan about being invited to review as academic life is so busy – there are grant proposals to write, students to supervise, conferences to attend, not to mention one's own manuscripts to write – but the inescapable truth is that reviewing your colleagues' work is a necessary part of the job description. Although nobody gets paid to do it, high-quality peer review pays dividends by promoting data validity and reproducibility and ensuring a better standard of published research all round. From the individual researcher's perspective, having your ‘peers’ evaluate the merits and limitations of your work and suggest improvements helps you to see the bigger picture and maximise the significance of your findings for the target audience. On the flip side, a bad reviewer can end up being the stuff of nightmares. In this latest instalment of the Words of Advice series, I provide tips on being a good reviewer. Reviewing is a skill that needs to be honed with practise and experience and being an expert in your field doesn't automatically make you a good reviewer. So, from early on in your career, I suggest that you devote time to practising and perfecting this art, as refining your reviewer skills will also help you to improve your own papers.

Keywords

Review, Peer Review, Publication, Originality, Methodology, Skills, Feedback, Acceptance, Rejection, Systematically 

Learning Outcomes

After undergoing this article you will be able to understand the following

1. What's peer review ?

2. What's the importance of peer review?

3. What's the types of peer review?

4. What's the process of reviewing a manuscript?

5. What factors are seen in a peer review?

6. Conclusions

References 

1. What's peer review ?

Peer review is the process of having manuscripts assessed by active researchers in a relevant field. It usually involves at least two or three reviewers who can offer suggestions to improve a manuscript and recommend accepting or rejecting it for publication.

The peer review can be

• single-anonymised peer review
• double-anonymised peer review
• transparent peer review
• transferable peer review

2. What's the importance of peer review?

Scientific findings and discoveries can have far-reaching implications for individuals and society. This is one reason why they undergo a process of quality control known as 'peer review' before they are published.

Peer review involves subjecting the author's scholarly work and research to the scrutiny of other experts in the same field to check its validity and evaluate its suitability for publication.
A peer review helps the publisher decide whether a work should be accepted.

The benefits of becoming a peer reviewer

There are many benefits to joining our peer review network. Read on to learn more about your potential and how to apply.

Give back to the community

However you work with chemistry, you belong to our global community of chemical scientists. Becoming a peer reviewer allows you to give back to the community that has helped you along the way.

Build your reputation

Peer reviewers are seen as experts in their fields who can give valuable opinions on the current literature. Joining our network demonstrates to others that your opinion is well-regarded and respected.

Unlock new opportunities

Reviewing submissions for a journal is a chance for you to develop your career. This experience could lead to new opportunities like joining an editorial or advisory board.

Strengthen your knowledge

By assessing new submissions, you naturally become aware of new research in your subject area. It is a chance for you to stay up to date with current developments.

3. What's the types of peer review?

Peer review is the independent assessment of your research paper by experts in your field. Its purpose is to evaluate the manuscript’s quality and suitability for publication. 

Single-anonymous peer review

In this model the reviewers know that you are the author of the article, but you don’t know the identities of the reviewers. This is the most common type of peer review for science and medicine journals. 

The anonymity of the reviewers is intended to make it easier for them to give full and honest feedback on an article, without fearing that the author will hold this against them. 

Doublr-anonymous peer review

In this model the reviewers don’t know that you are the author of the article. And you don’t know who the reviewers are either. Double-anonymous review is particularly common in the humanities and some social sciences. 

Many researchers prefer double-anonymous review because they believe it will give their paper a fairer chance than single-anonymous review. It can avoid the risk of a paper suffering from the unintended bias of reviewers who know the seniority, gender, or nationality of a paper’s author. 

Typically, it will mean that the reviewers know you are the author and also that their identity will be revealed to you at some point during the review or publication process. 

Open peer review 

Open review may also include publishing the names of the reviewers and even the reviewers’ reports alongside the article. Some open review journals also publish any earlier versions of your article, enabling the reader to see what revisions were made as a result of peer review. 

4. What's the process of reviewing a manuscript?

After you have carefully read the manuscript and taken notes on overall strengths and weaknesses, take another look at the journal's publication criteria and reviewer guidelines. Determine if you need to look at any part of the manuscript again. Go over your notes and decide what you'll recommend to the journal.

5. What factors are seen in a peer review?

 A good peer review should 

• Start with a (very) brief summary of the paper. ...
• Next, give the Editor an overview of what you thought of the paper. ...
• The rest of your review should provide detailed comments about the manuscript. ...
• Remember that you have two audiences: the Editor and the authors.
• The peer review process starts once you have submitted your paper to a journal. 
• After submission, your paper will be sent for assessment by independent experts in your field. 
• The reviewers are asked to judge the validity, significance, and originality of your work.
  

6. Conclusions

Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge

Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory

Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness

State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being overlooked

FAQs

What's pros and cons of the reviewing online?

Online reviews have become an integral part of the consumer decision-making process in today's digital age. While they offer valuable insights into products and services, they also come with their own set of advantages and disadvantages. It’s like a double-edged sword that a marketer has in their digital arsenal.

Pros:

Transparency: Online reviews provide transparency about products and services, allowing consumers to make informed decisions based on the experiences of others.

Authenticity: Genuine online reviews offer authentic feedback from real customers, giving potential buyers a realistic expectation of what to expect.

Diverse Perspectives: Online reviews come from a diverse range of people with different backgrounds and preferences, offering a variety of perspectives and insights.

Trust Building: Positive reviews can help build trust and credibility for businesses, as they serve as social proof of customer satisfaction.

Accessibility: With the proliferation of online platforms, accessing reviews has become easier than ever, enabling consumers to research products and services from anywhere at any time.

Cons:

Bias and Manipulation: Online reviews can be subject to bias and manipulation, as businesses or competitors may attempt to influence ratings and feedback through fake reviews or incentivized testimonials.

Limited Context: Reviews may lack context or specificity, making it challenging for consumers to fully understand the circumstances surrounding a particular experience.

Overreliance: Relying solely on online reviews may lead to skewed perceptions, as individual preferences and expectations vary greatly among consumers.

Inconsistency: The quality and reliability of online reviews can vary widely across different platforms, making it difficult to gauge their accuracy and relevance.

Negative Impact: Negative reviews, whether legitimate or not, can have a significant impact on businesses, potentially harming their reputation and credibility.

References 

Schmitz, J. (2014). Peer Review. In Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) (Hrsg.), CoScience – gemeinsam forschen und publizieren mit dem Netz. Hannover, Technische Informationsbibliothek. (German only)

Wilson, J. (2017). PEER REVIEW. The Nuts and Bolts: A Guide for Early Career Researchers. London, Sense about Science. (3. ed.)

Wagner, E. (2006). Ethics: What is it for? Nature.com Blogs, 14. Juni 2006. (accessed 05/12/2022)

Anderson, K. (2014). Your Question of the Day – What is „Peer Review“? The Scholarly Kitchen, 24. Juli 2014. (accessed 05/12/2022)

Harnad, S. (2014). Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or supplement fort he current outdated system? LSE – The Impact of Science Blog, 21. August 2014. (accessed 05/12/2022)

Smith, K. L. (2014) Just the Tip of the Iceberg | Peer to Peer Review. Library Journal, 13. März 2014. (accessed 19/12/2022)

Ross-Hellauer, T. (2017). What is open peer review? A systematic review. F1000Research, 6(588).

Mousavi, T. & Abdollahi, M. (2020). A review of the current concerns about misconduct in medical sciences publications and consequences. DARU Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 28, 359–369.