Date created: | Last Updated:

Category: Communication

Description: **Aim of this guide** This guide contains practical advice on what to consider when being asked to peer review for a scientific journal; from deciding on whether or not to accepting a peer review invitation to what to consider after submitting the report. The guide will be used in a workshop and a platform to empower non-statistician ECRs when conducting peer review of quantitative and empirical research. Key points of good peer review are summarized with reference to open (educational) resources, publications, blog posts, checklists and tools for further reference. To help ECRs critically evaluate the validity of the presented statistics, we put special emphasis on the review of the statistical design and methods. Ensuring that only methodologically sound research is published is essential. However, there are many cases where statistical errors are overlooked. Possible reasons include a lack of statistical knowledge, the lack of clarity on what peer review should cover, or common misconceptions on statistical concepts. Our guide is meant to support non-statistician ECRs in promoting good research practices via peer review. **Target group** With this guide we specifically, but not exclusively, target non-statistician ECRs in empirical and quantitative research fields, such as psychology, economy, biology, or political science. The targeted ECRs are situated in a career stage between early doctorate and early post-doctorate, with only limited experience in peer review.