Would you like to peek behind the curtain and better understand the peer review process for scientific journals?
In this article, I’ll explain to you…
- The concept behind the peer review process for scientific journals
- The various types of peer review processes for scientific journals
- How to determine if an article has been peer-reviewed
- Which types of articles you should avoid referencing in your own academic writing.
What is a Peer Review Process for scientific journals?
To ensure quality control in science, it has become standard practice for a submitted article to be anonymously reviewed by two or more experts in the same field of research.
An article is only published if the authors can satisfactorily address the criticism raised by these “reviewers”.
The history of the peer review process as we know it dates back to 1731. The Royal Society of Edinburgh then inspired several editors of philosophical journals to have their contributions reviewed by a committee of experts (Spier, 2002).
It is also recorded that Albert Einstein had his issues with the peer review process.
In the early 20th century, Einstein primarily published in German-language journals, which at the time did not have a peer review process. When he sent an article (by mail, of course) to the prestigious Physical Review in America, he was surprised by their practice of presenting his paper to an independent expert.
In a letter, he fumed over this, withdrew his work, and published it elsewhere. He believed the comments to be nonsensical and saw no reason to address them.
Types of Peer Review Processes
The three most common types of peer review processes are single-blind, double-blind, and open peer review.
The Single-Blind Peer Review Process Here, the reviewers know the authors’ names, but the authors do not know the reviewers’ names.
The Double-Blind Peer Review Process In this process, both the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous. This requires an editor who knows everyone’s identity.
The Open Peer Review Process Here, everyone knows each other at all times. When an article is published, the reviewer reports are also published.
The last one is particularly progressive because it creates a lot of transparency and allows the iterations of an article to be tracked. But it creates other problems and biases if the anonymity is taken away.
What Happens During the Peer Review Process?
The process begins with the authors submitting their work.
The Desk Reject
The manuscript then lands “on the desk” of an editor, who has two options. Should the article be sent for peer review, or not?
If not, the authors receive a “desk reject,” meaning the article is not even sent to reviewers but is directly and irrevocably rejected by the editor.
Reasons for a desk reject vary. For example, an article might be linguistically or stylistically so far from a publishable standard that it doesn’t make sense to occupy the time of several reviewers. However, the most common reason for a desk reject is actually the fit with the journal.
Journals have specific thematic focuses, and if an article deviates from these, even if it is of high quality, it is immediately rejected.
Major and Minor Revisions
In a few cases, an article may be so good and important that it is accepted immediately after a round of brief feedback.
For instance, many journals accelerated their peer review processes temporarily during the COVID-19 pandemic. It would have made no sense to drag urgently needed research through a process that takes years.
Normally, if a manuscript passes the desk stage, it moves to an editor who will oversee the article until publication.
There are different types of editors, such as an Editor-in-Chief, Senior Editors, or Associate Editors. The “lowest” category of editors is responsible for recruiting reviewers. Sometimes this editor remains anonymous, and sometimes not.
This editor sends the article to 2-3 reviewers, sets a deadline, and then it’s a waiting game.
Once the reports come back, the editor reviews the reports and, of course, the article, and writes their own report. This usually summarizes the key points of the reviewer reports and may also include additional points noticed by the editor.
The editor also decides on the next steps for the article. They can follow the reviewers’ recommendations or override them. In either case, all reports are sent to the authors. If the editor unjustifiably overrides all reviewers, they risk trouble from above, such as from the Editor-in-Chief.
If the article is voted for, the authors receive a deadline by which they may revise their manuscript, and then the process starts over.
Ideally, the same reviewers are invited to check the revision. A “Major Revision” involves substantial changes to the manuscript, while “Minor Revisions” or a “Conditionally Accept” only require minor adjustments.
The number of rounds an article must go through depends on the journal. The most prestigious journals often have the most difficult and longest processes or the toughest “desk”.
What Happens After a Peer Review Process?
In single- and double-blind processes, reviewer reports are generally not published, even if they are anonymous. This has its advantages, such as not having to worry about offending someone when criticizing their work or even rejecting it from publication.
Editors often face the unenviable task of having to reject works from renowned author teams, subsequently facing their anger and disappointment.
The reason the peer review process works is solely due to the reputation people gain from being a reviewer or editor of a particular journal. Moreover, everyone wants their own articles to be reviewed, so you might think twice before declining such a request, especially at the start of your scientific career.
How Can You Identify Peer-Reviewed Articles?
There are essentially two ways to do this.
Option 1: Research the Outlet
You’re not sure how, but somehow you stumbled upon an article through Google Scholar or Google. Research the name of the journal or conference and visit its website. There, you will usually find information on whether it employs a peer review process or not.
But that’s not the end of the story. There are thousands of questionable journals, such as the Open Access journals published by MDPI.
Although they officially have a peer review process, it’s a joke. Their business model is that authors pay a fee, and then their article gets published. If you’re interested in a video about questionable practices in science, just leave me a comment under this article!
With established publishers, authors or universities must also pay a fee, but you can assume that the peer review process is conducted properly.
Over time, try to identify the established publishers and journals or conferences of your discipline. Citing articles of dubious origin can negatively impact your own academic work. So, even if the article fits perfectly, it might be best to steer clear.
Option 2: Filter During Your Search
If you only search databases that index peer-reviewed articles, you won’t even have to ask this question.
Find out which databases list the most important publication outlets of your discipline and limit your search to these databases.
Further Reading Spier, R. (2002). The history of the peer-review process. TRENDS in Biotechnology, 20(8), 357-358.