01

How reviewers are chosen

—  The handling editor invites at least two independent reviewers for each manuscript.

—  Reviewers are chosen for their knowledge of the subject and of the methods used, for their independence, their availability, and their professional conduct.

—  Editors find reviewers through their own knowledge of the field, the reference list of the manuscript, bibliographic databases, the journal’s own pool of reviewers, and the people who have applied through Become a Reviewer.

—  Reviewers who are suggested by authors are never relied on alone, and the editor makes the final choice.

02

Checks

—  The editor checks the identity, affiliation, and publication record of a reviewer, and does not rely only on an unverified free email address.

—  Editors avoid reviewers who are close to the authors: those who recently collaborated with them, work at the same institution, supervise or are supervised by them, or are in a close personal relationship with them. See Reviewer Competing Interests.

—  Unusually fast or templated reviews, and linked accounts, are looked at by the editor.

03

Diversity

Editors may consider the institutional and geographic variety of reviewers, to bring a wider range of perspectives. Scholarly competence and the absence of disqualifying conflicts always come first.

04

Recognition

Reviewers are thanked by name on the Reviewer List, while their work on individual manuscripts stays confidential.

05

Related

Peer Review Process  ·  Reviewer Guidelines  ·  Reviewer List  ·  Become a Reviewer

06

Sources

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