Peer reviewer motivation and recognition

Reviewer motivation

The email subject line should indicate that this is a review invitation, and it should contain the journal name.

The main text should include:

Tip: Emails should end with a thank you before a suitable signature. Details about the article can be included after the signature – for example, the title, manuscript IDs, abstract, keywords, author names if single-anonymous or open peer review models.

It helps to personalize invitation emails to potential reviewers. Why is this particular researcher the most suitable expert to review the paper? Include this in your invitation email.

Also consider expanding your reviewer pool by engaging and mentoring early career researchers as reviewers.

We have more suggestions on how to increase the acceptance rate of reviewers here.

Yes, we fully support this suggestion. Asking a colleague or supervisor to review a manuscript before submission will usually be helpful.

Documenting the checks you make as an editor, on whether or not a paper is suitable for peer review, or should be desk rejected upon submission, may also be helpful. If authors are aware of the criteria you use, they may apply these criteria themselves and delay submitting until their manuscript is ready.

Some researchers may also benefit from using editing services before their article is ready to be reviewed by a journal.

There are a few things you can put in place, to help you find reviewers:

It is important to grow your journal’s reviewer pool, both numerically and geographically. Not only will this help you find reviewers faster, but it will also make sure that the journal doesn’t always rely on the same reviewers.

You can visit our guide on managing the peer review process for more details.

Reviewer recognition

There are many ways to recognize reviewers’ valuable contributions. As an editor, you can give feedback, send a thank you email, publish a list of reviewer names, or give Publons credits. At Taylor & Francis, we offer reviewer certificates upon request, give free access to journal content, and book discounts.

Our Excellence in Peer Review: Reviewer Training Network also strives to make a positive difference for reviewers by helping them to develop their skills and make connections with new journals.  

When selecting your top reviewer, you should always prioritize quality over quantity. This is where editor involvement is key, as they can bring in their knowledge of who has provided them with the most useful and insightful reports – those reports that helped them make decisions.

Yes, we provide reviewer certificates upon request. Our certificate of recognition serves as a formal acknowledgment of a reviewer’s role. Reviewers can request the certificate from their Taylor & Francis contact. It gives them something they can present to employers or their institutions (or simply use to decorate their office). A reviewer confirmation letter is also available on request.

A list of reviewers needs to protect reviewer anonymity and it should be compliant with privacy guidelines.

The reviewer list shouldn’t include researchers whose comments are easily recognized. Reviewers should not be surprised by the publication of a reviewer list. You should get their consent first and allow them to opt out if they wish. Taylor & Francis has given all reviewers the option to opt out since May 2020.

Editors must not compile their own reviewer list. Please ask your Taylor & Francis contact to compile this on your behalf, to make sure it is compliant with all data privacy guidelines.

As an editor, you know your community best. What works for one journal may not be well suited to all journals.

I’d suggest recognizing reviewers on the quality of review reports that they’ve produced, instead of quantity. Being very clear about how and why the winner has been selected could also improve the quality of reviews you receive more broadly.

Our survey showed that even experienced academics would value further training in writing great review reports, so this could represent a real opportunity if carried out appropriately.

This is a great question and a hot topic at Taylor & Francis. We are currently exploring options to better recruit and support reviewers who aren’t also researchers.

Reviewer training and guidelines

Yes, definitely! Please find out more from our reviewer training network program. 

Yes we do. You can read our guide for peer reviewers which includes the ethical guidelines that must be followed.

Please see the Taylor & Francis Peer Review Checklist. 

Most of our resources for reviewers are on this website that you are currently on (Editor Resources).

To go directly to the resources, please visit our reviewer guidelines page.

Yes, we are currently working on this.

For now, most of our guidance for reviewers can be found on the website you are currently on, Editor Resources.

Yes, we have developed a series of online training modules to support peer review learning. The series contains six bitesize videos that are only 3-5 minutes long, and they can be accessed at any time.

These videos can be used in addition to attending a workshop or as independent self-learning modules.

Please find out more about the training on our reviewer training program here.

We are exploring automation, but unfortunately this is not currently an option. In the meantime, reviewer certificates should still be requested from Taylor & Francis.

We suggest a period of 14 days. This is usually the right amount of time to allow reviewers to do a thorough job without making authors wait too long for a decision on their paper.

Of course, reviewers are busy people and there will often be unexpected reasons for delay, so we encourage editors to be understanding and allow extensions when requested.