What we expect of reviewers, and what reviewers can expect of us.
What to evaluate
- Originality — does the work advance the field?
- Methodological rigor — are the methods adequate to the question? Are sample sizes, controls, and statistical analyses appropriate?
- Reproducibility — are the data and code archived? Could a competent independent group reproduce the central finding?
- Presentation — is the manuscript clear and complete?
- Conclusions — are claims supported by the evidence presented?
What to do if you can't review
Decline promptly so the editor can re-assign. Suggest alternative reviewers if possible.
Constructive review
Focus on specific, actionable points. Indicate which concerns are essential vs. desirable. Distinguish factual disagreements from stylistic preferences.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts are confidential. Do not share, cite, or pass to AI services without editorial permission.
Conflict of interest
Decline if you have a financial, personal, or professional conflict. See the conflict-of-interest policy.
Format
Provide:
- A brief summary (2–3 sentences) of what the manuscript reports.
- Major points (numbered) that must be addressed.
- Minor points (numbered) that are desirable but not blocking.
- A recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.