The transformation of a manuscript into a publication-ready article is fragmentary without a peer-review process. Indeed, the different types of peer-review processes help evaluate and hone your scholarly works, but before you even submit the paper to a journal, you need to know what kind of peer review process your manuscript will go through.
A peer-review process depends on multiple criteria like research type, subject matter, journal management pattern, etc.
Understanding the peer-review process
Ideally, peer review is a process of manuscript evaluation by a peer or team of experts from the respective field.
They conduct a meticulous analysis of the manuscript to ensure it meets the high standards of journal publications. As a result, the authors receive suggestions to improvise and refine the manuscript before publication.
Peer review in journal publishing plays a vital role and helps in;
- Increasing the readability of the content,
- Making the review article robust by upholding the technicalities of the research work,
- Provide reliable data or references for the users, etc.
But, how does the peer review process work?
Here we go. It works in three different stages;
- Editor’s review: When you submit your manuscript to a journal, the editor team performs the suitability check. They examine if the submitted work offers a significant contribution to the journal.
- Initial peer review: Post-approval of the editor’s team, they contact technical experts for a comprehensive review and feedback.
Based on the peer reviewers’ suggestions, the author amends the manuscript and submits it back.
- Final peer review: This is the final stage of the peer-review process. The peer reviewers double-check for the accuracy and completeness of the updated manuscript.
Also, keep in mind that reviewers can reject the manuscript at any stage if the work doesn’t meet the guidelines.
These are the three primary stages of the peer review process of a research paper. However, it can vary depending on the type of journal and its management.
Different types of peer review processes
Peer-review models are constantly evolving with time and vary from journal to journal. However, it depends on the journal owners and publishers to choose suitable peer review processes for the assessment.
Here are the 7 different types of peer review models available for manuscript evaluation.
1. Single-blind peer review
Single-blind peer review is the most widely used peer-review process.
As the name suggests, this peer review does not allow the author to learn about the reviewer. So, only the reviewer knows the author’s identity.
- Since the author’s identity is revealed, the reviewer can refer to the author’s previous papers and understand his subject knowledge. Subsequently, that aids in the assessment.
- The reviewer’s anonymity helps to provide a fair judgment without any fear of the author’s criticism.
- If the author’s previously published papers have made a greater impact, the reviewer might not spend ample time evaluating the manuscript.
- It might be worrisome for authors if there are delays in the evaluation process as they are completely unaware of the reviewer’s response time.
2. Double-blind peer review
Double-blind peer review is another standard peer-review method in the journal publishing workflow.
In this process, both the author’s and the reviewer’s identities are hidden from each other. In simpler words, the author has no idea about the reviewer’s identity and vice versa.
- The chances are slim to face criticism from both the ends
- Author’s anonymity aids fair judgment
- The author’s anonymity cannot be assured as the author’s writing style or the research area might reveal the identity.
- The author should remove all the self-citations from the manuscript that can affect the research paper quality.
3. Open peer review
In open peer review, both the reviewer’s and the author’s identities are open and known by all the respective participants.
Also, it allows both the reviewer’s suggestions and the author’s responses to get published along with the article.
- It encourages an honest review because the reviewer’s signed report will also get published.
- The article's credibility increases as the reader can access a comprehensive report that includes both the reviewer’s name and comments or suggestions.
- The peer reviewers might limit their negative feedback fearing retribution
- Also, many reviewers disagree to work with the open review as it is not anonymous and might encounter the author’s criticisms
4. Post-publication peer review
Open access journals mainly use the post-publication peer-review process. The reviewers can also evaluate the article post-publication.
Moreover, the journal provides an exclusive platform to update the reviewer’s suggestions or comments. As a result, it helps to improve the quality and readability of the article.
- Journal publishing takes place faster because the evaluation step comes later in the process
- Post-publication peer review nurtures the research paper with more significant insights.
- Not every journal adopts this type of review
- The risks are higher when the paper is published without the primary level of content review and evaluation.
5. Transparent peer review
In transparent peer review, the author’s identity is revealed, while the reviewer’s identity is hidden until he/she complies with signing the report.
However, the published article will have the anonymous reviewers’ report alongside the research paper.
- Readers can access the reviewer’s comments and the author’s responses for their reference
- The reviewers can provide genuine feedback without any fear of retribution
- The reviewer’s anonymity might build pressure on the author’s state of mind
- A forever dilemma for reviewers whether to sign the report or not.
6. Collaborative peer review
In the collaborative peer review, the authors and reviewers discuss with each other to improve the manuscript.
However, the reviewers’ identity is not disclosed during the process. It can be unveiled at the time of publication.
- Authors can discuss anything and everything about the manuscript and improve their scholarly content work
- It saves the reviewer’s time
- The collaboration sometimes restricts the exploration of individual ideas and thoughts
- Too many suggestions and inputs at once might land the author into a state of confusion
7. Cascading peer review
When the editor rejects the manuscript because of an irrelevant journal niche or low priority at the moment, he refers the author to an alternate journal to submit the manuscript along with the reviewer’s report. This is how cascading peer review works.
- The authors manuscript will get published anyway
- It helps the author to build a professional network
- Consumes more time compared to traditional peer reviews
- The initial rejection of the manuscript might put the author under pressure
These are the 7 types of peer review processes you will find in a journal publication workflow.
The most common difference in the above-mentioned peer-review processes is publishing peer review materials associated with the articles. That said, not all publications publish peer review materials.
But, publishing peer review materials alongside articles makes the peer review process more lucid and acts as a credible source of information for the readers.
Know about peer review materials and JATS XML tagging
Well, peer review materials are nothing but the trail of documents produced during the peer review process.
- Reviewer’s report (might include or exclude the reviewer’s name)
- Author’s responses
- Journal editor’s approved letter
Publishing these documents alongside the article increases the citation count and helps readers to understand your thesis better.
Now that you know the advantage of publishing peer review materials, tell me, how do you append them to the articles?
Certainly, there are three different ways to append them;
- Mostly, the peer review materials are attached in PDF form. So, to simplify the capturing of essential metadata from the article, support interoperability of semantic tagging, and identify the files in a machine-readable format, JATS XML tagging should be equipped.
- They can be appended as the sub-article XML component within the article.
- And, these documents can also be a full-text XML article that links to the main article bidirectionally.
JATS XML tagging stores rich and extensive metadata. Also, since it moves along with the article wherever it gets published or archived, the first method of appending peer-review materials is recommended.
To sum it up, the type of peer review process does have a definite effect on journal publishing in maintaining the standards of a publication. Honestly, the peer-review process is a time-taking process in journal publication but is equally important to make your scholarly content more authentic and credible.
However, you might have to exchange and record a series of emails with reviewers and editors if you choose traditional publishing.
But you can save your time and energy by using an automated journal management platform like SciSpace (Formerly Typeset). It enables you to write your research paper in a pre-templatized manner and allows you to collaborate with editors, reviewers, and different authors within the same platform without having to exchange multiple emails for follow-ups.
Before you go, SciSpace may be of interest if you are trying to simplify their research workflows. Discover, write, and collaborate on research papers using this comprehensive end-to-end solution. Your scholarly output can be displayed and managed seamlessly with the tools and resources we provide.
By combining writing and publishing tools, copyright detection technology, and searchable indexing, this platform will let you display and manage your scholarly output.It is a good idea to make notes about your citations while conducting a literature review.
With SciSpace Discover, it is easy to cite your sources. Using the citation button on an article page, you can generate citation text that is preloaded in multiple formats, so you can copy and paste as you need.
So, why not sign up for SciSpace and streamline your journal production workflow.
If you want to explore more about research article publications and the processes involved, refer to the blogs below:
- PDF to JATS XML Conversion — Why it’s important for an Academic Publisher
- Choosing the Right Journal — A Comprehensive Guide for Early-career Researchers
- The 4-Step Guide That Will Get Your Research Published
- Top reasons for research paper rejection
- 5 Reasons why Professors are Moving Away from Manual Formatting