Understanding the Peer Review Process: A Guide for New Reviewers

Being invited to review a manuscript for the first time is a recognition of your expertise — and a responsibility not to be taken lightly. Peer review is how academic publishing maintains its standards, and reviewers are at the centre of that process. This guide explains what happens at each stage and what is expected of you.

Before You Accept

When you receive an invitation, you have three obligations before accepting. First, check for conflicts of interest: do you know the authors, have you collaborated with them recently, or do you have a competing financial interest in the topic? If yes, declare this to the editor immediately. Second, check that the paper falls within your genuine area of expertise — accepting work outside your competence does the authors a disservice. Third, check your availability: a late or perfunctory review is worse than a prompt decline.

Reading the Manuscript

Read the full manuscript at least twice before writing anything. On the first read, understand the argument and the findings. On the second read, evaluate critically: Are the research questions well-defined? Is the methodology appropriate? Are the results correctly interpreted? Do the conclusions follow from the data?

Writing the Review Report

A good review report is organised, specific, and constructive. Structure your comments into major concerns (issues that would materially change the conclusions) and minor concerns (clarity, referencing, presentation). For every concern you raise, explain why it is a concern and, where possible, suggest a remedy. Vague criticism such as "the methods are weak" is unhelpful — say specifically what is missing and why it matters.

Tone and Confidentiality

Your report may be critical, but it should never be contemptuous. You are reviewing the work, not the person. Confidentiality is absolute: you must not share the manuscript, discuss it publicly, or use the ideas in your own work before the paper is published.

Your Decision Recommendation

Most journals ask you to recommend one of: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject. Your recommendation should follow logically from your comments. If you have only minor concerns, do not recommend major revisions. If the manuscript has fundamental flaws that cannot be corrected through revision, recommend rejection and explain clearly.

Reviewing well takes time. Expect to spend three to five hours on a typical manuscript review. That investment contributes directly to the quality of the published scientific record.