Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Oct 24;25(3):227-43.
eCollection 2014 Oct.

Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide

Affiliations

Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide

Jacalyn Kelly et al. EJIFCC. .

Abstract

Peer review has been defined as a process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. It functions to encourage authors to meet the accepted high standards of their discipline and to control the dissemination of research data to ensure that unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations or personal views are not published without prior expert review. Despite its wide-spread use by most journals, the peer review process has also been widely criticised due to the slowness of the process to publish new findings and due to perceived bias by the editors and/or reviewers. Within the scientific community, peer review has become an essential component of the academic writing process. It helps ensure that papers published in scientific journals answer meaningful research questions and draw accurate conclusions based on professionally executed experimentation. Submission of low quality manuscripts has become increasingly prevalent, and peer review acts as a filter to prevent this work from reaching the scientific community. The major advantage of a peer review process is that peer-reviewed articles provide a trusted form of scientific communication. Since scientific knowledge is cumulative and builds on itself, this trust is particularly important. Despite the positive impacts of peer review, critics argue that the peer review process stifles innovation in experimentation, and acts as a poor screen against plagiarism. Despite its downfalls, there has not yet been a foolproof system developed to take the place of peer review, however, researchers have been looking into electronic means of improving the peer review process. Unfortunately, the recent explosion in online only/electronic journals has led to mass publication of a large number of scientific articles with little or no peer review. This poses significant risk to advances in scientific knowledge and its future potential. The current article summarizes the peer review process, highlights the pros and cons associated with different types of peer review, and describes new methods for improving peer review.

Keywords: journal; manuscript; open access; peer review; publication.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of the review process
Figure 2
Figure 2
How a peer review evaluates a manuscript

References

    1. “What Is Peer Review?” (2014). Int J Comput Appl. Web. Retrieved July 02, 2014, from http://www.iicaon-line.org/peer-review
    1. “Peer Review”. (2014). Elsevier Publishing Guidelines. Web. Retrieved June 24, 2014, from http://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/peer-review
    1. Spier R. (2002). “The History of the Peer-review Process.” Trends Biotechnol, 20(8): 357-358. - PubMed
    1. Liumbruno GM., Velati C., Pasaualetti P., Franchini M. (2012). “How to Write a Scientific Manuscript for Publica-tíon.” Blood Transfus, 11(2): 217-226. - PMC - PubMed
    1. “Peer Review: What It Is, Why It’s Done and How to Do It”. Elsevier; Web. Retrieved June 26, 2014, from www.meatscience.ore/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=8503

LinkOut - more resources