Peer Review should be seen as process that helps to improve the quality of the research. Peer review can be formal or informal and happens at different levels throughout a project. Traditionally the formal peer review has been associated with publishing a journal article. However, new forms of peer review are emerging in publishing and also beyond in the research landscape. Peer review can be done on many different research outputs, including:
manuscripts
software (including code, documentation, and examples)
datasets
communication and presentation materials
When most people think of peer review they think of this in the context of reviewing a journal article. Journal articles, as opposed to preprints preprint, have gone through the peer review process- the paper has been peer reviewed and modified by the author in response to the reviewer’s suggestions, so these papers are seen to have added value. However, there are also initiatives to peer reviewpreprints, for example, Peer Community In arranges reviews for manuscripts.
Traditionally, the review process is designed to be anonymous. However, some reviewers sign their reviews. A non-anonymous review can be seen as an accountability device: by exposing who they are to the authors of the paper, the reviewers set higher standards for themselves. There is also a process called open peer review; in this case, the review is open for everyone viewing the paper. The peer review might blend these features; for example, one might be able to see the review text but not the name of the reviewer who did it, or the name of the reviewer but not the text itself. The design of the peer review process and its transparency varies from journal to journal.
Before an article can be published in a peer-reviewed journal, it must undego the evaluation by external experts in the same filed, with the appropriate expertise to judge someone's else research results. These external experts (peer reviewers) must check the manuscript for accuracy and assess the quality of the work, validity of the research methodology and procedures.
In scientific publishing, four main types of peer reviewing can be distinguished.
Single-blind peer reviewmeans that reviewers are aware of who the authors are, but authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript.
Double-blind peer review is one where both reviewers and authors are unaware of each other’s
Open peer reviewdoes not have an element of anonymity. Both the authors and the reviewers are aware of each other’s identities.
Transparent peer review menas that the readers can access and read the exchange between authors and reviewers. Reviewers are aware of who the authors are, but the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript unless the reviewer chooses to reveal their identity by signing their report.
Every type of the peer review listed above has certain pros and cons.