This Bentham Science blog is part of a series we’ve put together on peer review. Read our previous blog in which we explain the uniquely thorough way that peer review is done at Bentham Science.

Peer review plays a critical role in the academic publishing process, ensuring the quality and integrity of scholarly research. You should never submit a research paper to a journal if you are unsure about the peer review methodology. As an aspiring academic, selecting the appropriate peer review process for your next academic paper is crucial. However, with various types of peer review available, it can be challenging to determine the most suitable. In this blog post, we explore the 5 different types of peer review and provide guidelines to help you make an informed decision on which is best for you.

Peer review is essential to the academic publishing process and is being actively discussed at the moment. This is because journals and publishers have found it increasingly harder to find good peer reviewers since around the time of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Now the situation is becoming increasingly critical.

Types of Peer Review

There are 5 types of peer review that are most used by journals. The specific method used can vary depending on the publisher, the journal, a researcher’s field of study, and the nature of the research being reviewed. Here is a list of the most common types:

  1. Single-Blind Review: In this method, the reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, but the authors do not know who the reviewers are. This is the most used form of peer review across academic journals globally. The main advantage of single-blind peer review from a journal’s perspective is that this is the form that most peer reviewers are happiest with: They can remain anonymous in order to make comments on articles. Researchers also like this form of peer review because it is often the fastest method.
  2. Double-Blind Review: In double-blind review, both the reviewers and the authors are anonymous. This is done to minimize bias and ensure impartial evaluation. Many journals either use this approach as default or provide an option to authors to choose this method of peer review when making submissions. It’s important to understand the implications of selecting this style of peer review. Advantages from a researcher’s perspective include that their anonymity is protected: Therefore, there can be no inherent bias based on country of origin or institution. In Bentham Science journals, this is the preferred peer review method.
  3. Open Review: Open review involves disclosing the identities of both the reviewers and the authors. This type of review promotes transparency and accountability but can be subject to biases based on reputation and personal relationships. This type of peer review is widely advocated, especially as a component of ‘Open Research’ but its uptake has so far been relatively limited, other than on preprint servers.
  4. Post-Publication Review: Post-publication review occurs after a research article has been published. It allows for public feedback and discussion of research, often through online platforms or comments sections. Post-Publication peer review is little different from discussions around research that have been going on for decades on a variety of platforms.
  5. Collaborative Review: This approach involves multiple reviewers working together to evaluate a manuscript. It allows for a broader range of perspectives and can lead to more comprehensive feedback. Collaborative peer review is common in some research fields (e.g. Mathematics).

Which kind of peer review is best for my research?

It’s important to understand that the peer review process can differ between academic disciplines and individual journals or conferences. In mathematics, for example, peer review is most often completely open, and articles are not accepted either by journals or the research community unless a number of well-respected colleagues have had the chance to work on them and check the work is correct. In other fields, double-blind peer review is preferred. specific methods and variations may vary across different contexts.

Here are some suggested guidelines for choosing the best peer review option for your next paper:

  • Consider the field and journal: Different disciplines and journals may have specific review preferences or requirements. Familiarize yourself with the publication guidelines and consult colleagues or mentors for advice.
  • Assess your research stage: The level of review appropriate for your paper may vary depending on the stage of your research. Early-stage findings may benefit from collaborative or preprint reviews, while more mature research may warrant traditional or double-blind reviews.
  • Weigh the benefits and drawbacks: Each peer review type has its advantages and limitations. Consider factors such as transparency, potential biases, and time constraints to make an informed decision.
  • Reflect on personal preferences: Evaluate your comfort level with the various review processes. Some authors may value anonymity, while others may prefer the open exchange of ideas.
  • Seek feedback from peers: Engage with your academic community to gather insights and experiences with different review models. This collaborative effort can help you gauge the effectiveness and suitability of specific peer review approaches.

Choosing the right peer review for your academic paper involves careful consideration of various factors, including the field of study, the stage of research, and personal preferences. By understanding the different peer review types available and reflecting on your specific needs, you can make an informed decision that will enhance the quality and impact of your work. Remember, peer review is a collaborative process that aims to strengthen research, and selecting the appropriate model can contribute significantly to the advancement of knowledge in your field.

All publishers saw a spike in submissions around the start-middle of the pandemic as researchers were stuck at home, often with data and results that needed to be written up. Researchers worked over their backlog of data, creating a huge series of articles that were fed into the journal peer review system. But, at the same time, reviewers were needed – from the same pool of active researchers – to work on these articles for journals. That’s the nature of the journal peer review system.

At Bentham Science, our peer review system is a little different: We only draw from an established pool of experts we’ve worked with in the past – more than 80,000 to be exact. All of these experts have respectable H-indices, normally above 15, and have been vetted by our team so we know they’ll do a good, thorough, and effective job. That’s the Bentham peer review promise.

To help our authors, we also provide support and training in peer review: Helping researchers to understand the process, such as with this Blog. In this article we’ll look at the different kinds of peer review used by academic journals, including those published by Bentham Science. Making an informed selection – which peer review is best for you and your paper – can help you to speed up the publication process and enhance your effectiveness as a researcher.

By Peer Review