01

What is prohibited

—  Fake reviewer identities, impersonation, or taking over the account of a real reviewer.

—  Reviews written by an author, an associate of an author, or someone with an undisclosed interest.

—  Review rings: groups that review one another’s work favourably.

—  Coercive or irrelevant demands to cite particular works.

—  Disclosing confidential material, or trying to find out the identity of reviewers or authors.

—  Trying to influence a decision outside legitimate scholarly communication, for example by pressure on the editors.

02

What the journal may do

—  Check the identity of reviewers and look at patterns in reviews.

—  Withdraw an invitation, set aside a compromised report, and obtain a new review.

—  Reject a manuscript.

—  Correct or retract a published article that was accepted because of a compromised peer review.

—  Tell the institutions, funders, or other journals involved, where the evidence supports it.

03

How concerns are handled

Concerns are handled under the Research Misconduct policy. Reports of manipulation can be sent as described in Whistleblowing and Ethics Complaints.

04

Reviewers

A reviewer who breaks these rules may be removed from the list of reviewers, and the editors may tell the reviewer’s institution.

05

Related

Research Misconduct  ·  Reviewer Selection  ·  Correction & Retraction

06

Sources

This policy is based on the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):