Should rating of top reviewers be made available on journal websites?
Peer review process forms a crucial part in the publishing journey. Generally single-blind and double-blind peer review processes are used by journals. The identity of reviewers is never disclosed during both single-blind and double-blind peer reviews. This practice is consistently similar across most reputed journals like Nature, PLOS, Science, or Cell. Peer reviewers are mostly experienced members of the publishing industry. Currently, there is no such rating available for peer reviewers. In fact, some industry experts believe that peer reviewers may feel pressurized to share a relatively milder or biased feedback if they know that the manuscript authors may come to learn about their identity during or after the review process. In some cases, reviewer comments may turn out to be too harsh on the authors. Therefore disclosing their identity may help in reducing this practice among reviewers. However, a few other experts tend to believe that this may in fact bring in more transparency and accountability in the overall process. In summary, rapid access to peer reviewer ratings comes with its own set of pros and cons. Till date, no foolproof solution is available. Nevertheless, the peer review process itself should never be bypassed, regardless of whether the identities become public or not.
To know more about the peer review process, please check Enago Learn’ course on peer review process. To get your manuscript reviewed by experts, you can also avail Enago’ Peer Review services and increase your chances of manuscript acceptance.
