What is Peer Review?

To be able to examine the positive and negative concepts of the current peer review systems, one must define the term “peer review” and discover its underlying purpose. Peer review serves in providing intentional and constructive feedback to research authors, encouraging the improvement of their work.[1] Another major aspect of peer review in this context is in the assurance of quality, where a certain standard is met depending on the specific concepts of a study, such as the emphasis on methodological concerns of qualitative research.[1] The act of peer review has been a consistent practice across varying academic disciplines overall, serving to determine the works that obtain the prestige necessary to count as knowledge, and working to enforce the standards and rigor of scholarship.[2] Overall, these elements ensure that a work is qualified and refined enough to be ready for publication, serving towards enhanced learning and the growth of knowledge.

Without the use of peer review, a field’s standards and requirements for a work could potentially not be met, thus affecting the quality and organization of ideas presented to their academic audience. This, in effect, encourages the authors to meet and exceed high standards and maintain the filtering of unwarranted claims and personal views out of academic works.[3] However, there are other positives as well as negatives of peer review that are important to discuss in gaining a well-rounded perspective on the topic.

Positive Impacts

The process of peer review showcases various positives, one of which being continuous academic improvement. The feedback received during peer review allows the author to not only focus on acquiring knowledge, but to also develop dynamic skills necessary for certain academic milestones.[4] This, in turn, reveals how peer review relies heavily on constructive feedback, where such is largely deemed necessary for successful development overall.[4] Specifically, when this feedback is provided by mentors and/or peers, an improved environment can be fostered as foundational aspects such as mutual trust, communication, and responsibility become critical in its success.[4]

A major aspect of peer review is in its gatekeeping nature. At large, gatekeeping is considered essential in maintaining the quality and integrity of the specific topic being discussed.[5] This process works as a “quality indicator” of sorts, thus creating the increased desire to publish peer-reviewed journals and/or research studies.[5] Additionally, with the ever-increasing advancement of technology and methods of conducting peer review, various opportunities have been opened up to authors, including post-publication peer review, a larger quantity of works being published, increased specialization, etc.[5] With the higher frequency of these positives, academic works are provided the opportunity to gatekeep of their specific field of knowledge and contain the information portrayed by experts that have trusted knowledge of the topic.

Another central concept of peer review is in the transparency of feedback received. In the act of “open” peer review, advocating towards more constructive feedback that reduces the likelihood of bias allows for the reviewer to credibly provide suggestions for the author.[5] Advocates of this specific mode of peer review claim that open review also can help to reduce the potential of reviewers taking advantage of their position, causing plagiarism or rejection for invalid reasons.[5] With these preventions in place, supporters of this process, can feel secure and assured that their field of study contains experienced and knowledgeable reviewers that provide valuable feedback.

Not only does peer review help to validate an author’s work/findings but also aids in the increase of their skills as writers in general. In peer review, an author can gain a broader perspective of aspects within their works that are/aren’t important towards the representation of subjects within their field.[2] And, as important as receiving feedback is, it is also beneficial for an author to partake in the peer review process of other pre-published works. This allows for self-reflection in the author, where they can potentially identify some similar habits and assumptions associated with their own study and knowledge, thus giving more in-depth insight into the view of discipline.[2] 

Potential and Existing Issues

While peer review can have positive effects on a work and specific fields of study, there are potential and pre-existing issues observable throughout the process. One major element is the bias targeted against Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and the lack of diversity in peer review overall. The element of inequity seemingly-systemic within the peer review process adds a barrier to BIPOC success as faculty in these environments, resulting in unfulfilled ethical obligations.[6] One study depicts statistics of this issue, which resulted in the finding that much of the BIPOC individuals within the field are underrepresented within the membership base when placed next to the U.S. population.[6] This illustrates a clear need for reconstruction within the peer review field, where a larger emphasis on diverse voices and teaching is needed to represent these populations and credit them for their work.

In relation to discriminatory habits within peer review, the gatekeeping element can also fall under this effect. Those within peer review that desire change in the field have critiqued the act in its sometimes inconsistent and over-reliant unpaid labor that contains the potential for discrimination within feedback.[1] With these occurrences, works may face unfair rejection and/or feedback that’s ineffective in the bettering of its presented knowledge. In addition, when this feedback is “unidirectional and not interactive,” its importance towards a work is unheard and usually not utilized in the revision stages.[4]

Conclusive Thoughts

In examining both the positive and negative aspects of peer review, one can observe that peer review offers a means of providing constructive feedback to an author, but can also potentially lean into discriminatory behaviors, thus invalidating the process. When considering the main aspects of valid peer review, a comprehensive list contains simple elements that should be contained in any provided feedback: Be professional, pleasant, helpful, timely, realistic, open, and empathetic.[3] If a reviewer keeps these aspects in mind when approaching a work, or if future improvements of the peer review field contain these elements in their efforts, peer review can become a constructive environment that emphasizes all voices and maintains a sense of respect through all fields of study.

How Does PSG Fit In?

At Publishing Solutions Group, we recognize the significant role that elements such as peer review play in the success of content development and published works. Therefore, we aim to provide the polished and articulate materials and content necessary for authors and peer reviewers to thrive in their academic environments. As a team, we work to provide any service necessary, such as design, editorial, or translation, that would help to enhance the positive effects of processes like peer reviewing.

[1] https://asmepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/medu.14932

[2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8612588/

[3] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4975196/

[4] https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14980

[5] https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0051-5

[6] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35758875/

Photo free to use under the Unsplash License.