Peer Review Q&A
Questions provided by the SAGE Sussex Hive scholars
Answers provided by the SAGE Peer Review team
Peer review is an essential part of research and academic publishing, driving advancement in the chosen research area whilst helping editors shape the content of their journals and authors improve their papers. As such, SAGE highly values researchers who opt to peer review, providing benefits to those who choose to do so. For those researchers who are just beginning to review, or for those who would like a recap, some of the details of peer reviewing can be found below.
1. How do I become a peer reviewer?
There are plenty of ways to get involved. You can:
Contact the editor of a relevant journal(s) to register your interest
Create an account in the journal submission system
To increase the likelihood of being invited to review, ensure you list as many keywords or areas of expertise that are relevant – the more specific, the better.
Most peer reviewers will already have their PhD or an equivalent level of experience, however, it is possible for early career researchers to review papers when appropriate steps have been followed. See our Reviewer FAQs for more information on this.
2. Do peer review guidelines vary?
Peer review guidelines can vary from journal to journal. It’s best to check the publisher’s website for these (for example, SAGE have a How to Review Articles section on the Reviewer Gateway).
We recommend that all of our reviewers read SAGE’s Reviewer’s Guide and follow COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Some journals carry specific reviewer guidelines, so please check the journal’s website before embarking on your report.
3. What should I do if no guidelines are provided?
Ask the editor who invited you to provide some additional guidance
Complete Web of Science Academy training
Ask for help from your supervisor
4. How long should my review be?
This is hard to quantify. The journal may provide criteria, but regardless, you should comment on the:
Appropriateness of the title, keywords and abstract
Introduction – does it give enough background information?
Aims of the study – are they clear and specific?
Materials and methods – is the study design and methodology appropriate and replicable?
Accuracy and consistency of data
Analyses performed – are they detailed enough?
Presentation and clarity of the results
Discussion and Conclusions – including strengths and limitations of the study
Statements of ethics approval and informed consent where relevant
Adherence to appropriate reporting guidelines
Bear in mind that the editor will need to use your review to make a decision, so the more detailed comments you supply, the better. It is important to note any gaps in your knowledge – e.g. is a specialist statistical review needed?
5. How much time do I have to submit a peer review of an article?
This will vary - if the invite letter doesn't specify, ask the editorial office or editor who invited you. Typically the time allowed will fall between 1-4 weeks, but if you are not sure, it is always worth checking, as late reviews are one of the issues that will slow down the reviewing process.
6. What recognition will I receive for completing a peer review?
Once a review is completed it can be entered into Web of Science Reviewer Recognition, a free platform where review activity can be listed. The value of review activity is also increasingly being acknowledged by the research community and in tenure/promotion discussions. Please also check the Reviewer Rewards page for the other benefits of reviewing for SAGE.
7. Once I’ve completed my review will I receive any further notifications about the paper?
Reviewers will often be invited to review revised versions of the paper. You will likely be provided with the Author Responses to the decision letter, which should include details on what revisions were made.
Once a final decision on the paper has been made some journals will inform the reviewers of the outcome. If you review for one of our Web of Science Reviewer Recognition partnered journals you can opt in to be automatically notified if/when the article is published.
Some journals publish reviewer comments and recommendations openly (a form of Open Peer Review).
As the above indicates, the peer review process may vary from journal to journal. If you have been asked to review for a particular journal and still have questions, please contact the editor who asked you to review, who will either be able to answer your question or forward it on to someone who can.
Otherwise, you will find that with each review you complete you will become more confident in assessing a paper and making a written assessment of it.