Skip to Main Content

Graduate Student Research Support

Guidance to help new scholars navigate the realm of scholarship.

Email this link:

Types of peer review

In the world of peer review, there is an ongoing joke about Reviewer #2. You may even find Facebook groups, X posts, and various other memes about this reviewer. This infamous reviewer is typically grumpy or aggressive - the harshest critic. However, peer review is designed to assess the validity, quality and originality of articles for publication. There are a few different types of peer review:

  • Single-anonymous peer review
    • In this model, also called ‘single blind peer review’, the reviewers know that you are the author of the article, but you don’t know the identities of the reviewers. This is the most common type of peer review for science and medicine journals. The anonymity of the reviewers is intended to make it easier for them to give full and honest feedback on an article, without fearing that the author will hold this against them. 
  • Double-anonymous peer review
    • In this model, also called ‘double blind peer review’, the reviewers don’t know that you are the author of the article. And you don’t know who the reviewers are either. Double-anonymous review is particularly common in the humanities and some social sciences. Many researchers prefer double-anonymous review because they believe it will give their paper a fairer chance than single blind review. It can avoid the risk of a paper suffering from the unintended bias of reviewers who know the seniority, gender, or nationality of a paper’s author. 
  • Open peer review
    • There is no one agreed definition of open peer review. In fact, a recent study identified 122 different definitions. Typically, it will mean that the reviewers know you are the author and also that their identity will be revealed to you at some point during the review or publication process. Open review may also include publishing the names of the reviewers and even the reviewers’ reports alongside the article. Some open review journals also publish any earlier versions of your article, enabling the reader to see what revisions were made as a result of peer review.
  • Post-publication peer review
    • In these models, your paper may still go through one of the forms of peer review outlined above first. Alternatively, it may be published online almost immediately after some basic checks. Either way, once it is published, there will then be an opportunity for invited reviewers or even readers to add their own comments or reviews.
  • Registered reports
    • The Registered Reports process splits peer review into two parts. The first round of peer review takes place after you’ve designed your study but before you’ve collected or analyzed any data. This allows you to get feedback on both the question you’re looking to answer, and the experiment you’ve designed to test it. If your manuscript passes peer review, the journal will give you an in-principle acceptance (IPA). This indicates that your article will be published as long as you successfully complete your study according to the pre-registered methods and submit an evidence-based interpretation of the results.

(Adapted from Taylor & Francis)

Resources

Peer review process

What happens on the journal's side of the peer review process? This video has a few editors discussing what happens on their end when an article is submitted for publication. While the editors represent social science journals that focus on methods, they offer insight on the process of receiving a submission through getting it published.