Date created: | Last Updated:

Category: Project

Description: Academia critically relies on our efforts as peer reviewers, for instance to academic journals. Through our reviews, we can help to improve the quality of research that gets published. But how do we ensure the quality of peer review? Few people get training in how to review research. To improve the quality of our peer reviews, I've lined up a set of guidelines that I think are helpful in the following paper: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/7ug4w The suggestions are not based on the meta science of science, but on my experiences as an author, reviewer, and editor. As a reviewer, I have learned a lot from reading the reviews of others. As a reviewer, author and editor alike I have noticed that the quality of peer reviews varies considerably, and that some reviews are not helpful at all. I would love to hear your experiences: which things have you learned about reviewing? Based on your feedback, I will revise the paper, with the goal to develop a guide for reviewers at journals in our field.