Reviewers' Information Pack / Version 2.0 - (Page 3)
Reviewers’ Information Pack
Supporting Peer-Review 2. ABOUT PEER-REVIEW
2.1. What is Peer-Review?
Today, validation by peers and publication in a scientific journal continues to be the method through which authors register, validate, disseminate and archive their discoveries and results. The publication process and the speed at which articles are peerreviewed and published are key elements in the appropriate accreditation of scientific findings. Elsevier is an active participant in innovations intended to improve the current process, e.g. the Neuroscience Peer-Review Consortium. The peer-review process is an essential part of the publishing process. It validates and confirms a researcher’s work and establishes a method through which work can effectively be evaluated. Although in recent years the peer-review process has attracted some criticism, it remains the only widely accepted method for research validation and a cornerstone of the scientific publishing process. Elsevier, like most scientific publishing companies, relies on effective peer-review processes to not only uphold the quality and validity of individual articles, but also the overall integrity of the journals we publish.
2.3. Why Reviewers Review?
The peer-review process allows authors and editors an opportunity to use and develop their own expertise in a number of significant ways. By assessing the quality and validity of another author’s work, within the same area of expertise, a reviewer: • Ensures the continued rigorous standards of the scientific process since the peer-review system has been in place for centuries and each generation of researchers engaged in the process contributes to the ever increasing wealth of scientific information • Upholds the integrity of the journal, by identifying invalid research, as well as the reviewer helps the journal maintain its quality and standards • Fulfills a sense of scientific obligation to the community and their own area of concentration • Establishes relationships with reputable colleagues and their affiliated journals, and may also increase his / her opportunity to be invited to join an Editorial Board • Reciprocates professional courtesy as typically authors and reviewers are often interchangeable roles. In assisting an author with their paper, reviewers ‘repay’ the same courtesy they receive when authoring their own papers • Establish expertise in and knowledge of the field • Increase reputation and exposure to key figures in the community • Stays current and ‘in the loop’ with respect to the discipline’s latest literature.
2.2. Who are Reviewers?
Most reviewers are themselves authors, researchers, or sometimes, editors in their own right. Reviewers are in fact colleagues and fellow scientists who wish to directly contribute an integral part of the scientific process. With this in mind, reviewers play an essential part in science, and in scholarly publishing. For more than 300 years, scientists and scholars have relied upon peerreview to validate research, engage other specialists in the support of submitted work, and increase networking possibilities within specific specialist communities.
www.elsevier.com/reviewers
3
http://www.elsevier.com/reviewers
http://www.elsevier.com/reviewers
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Reviewers' Information Pack / Version 2.0
Reviewers' Information Pack / Version 2.0
Table of Contents
1. About Elsevier
1.1. A Short History of Elsevier
2. About Peer-Review
2.1. What Is Peer-Review?
2.2. Who Are Reviewers?
2.3. Why Reviewers Review?
2.4. Peer-Review Process
2.5. Types of Peer-Review
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
3.2. Promptness
3.3. Confidentiality
3.4. Standards of Objectivity
3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.7. Adherence to Elsevier Publishing Ethics
4. Peer-Review System
4.1. Elsevier Editorial System (EES)
4.2. Tools to Help
5. Supporting Our Reviewers
5.1. Online Support
5.2. Training
6. Listening to Our Reviewers
6.1. Reviewer Feedback Programme
6.2. Reviewers’ Home
6.3. Elsevier and Sense About Science Reviewer Survey
7. A Brief Guide to Reviewing
7.1. Purpose of Peer-Review
7.2. On Being Asked to Review
7.3. Conducting the Review
7.4. Communicating Your Report to the Editor
Reviewers' Information Pack / Version 2.0
https://www.nxtbookmedia.com