Scholarly peer review

<p>Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's <a href="/facts/Scholarly_method/W4eDafUn">methods</a> and <a href="/facts/Research/mo8joeTL">findings</a> reviewed (usually anonymously) by <a href="/facts/Expert/W1BtG3h1">experts</a> (or "peers") in the same field.  Peer review is widely used for helping the academic publisher (that is, the <a href="/facts/Editor-in-chief/d76Qb3Tr">editor-in-chief</a>, the <a href="/facts/Editorial_board/7cjC14xC">editorial board</a> or the <a href="/facts/Academic_conference/0YAVfxe3">program committee</a>) decide whether the work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or rejected for official publication in an <a href="/facts/Academic_journal/SBI7Ue0q">academic journal</a>, a <a href="/facts/Monograph/o8VRGpVc">monograph</a> or in the <a href="/facts/Conference_proceeding/fpdlh1Sr">proceedings</a> of an <a href="/facts/Academic_conference/0YAVfxe3">academic conference</a>. If the identities of authors are not revealed to each other, the procedure is called dual-anonymous peer review.
</p><p>Academic peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) <a href="/facts/Academic_field/pKoQHpYL">academic field</a>, who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish, and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Peer review is generally considered necessary to academic quality and is used in most major scholarly journals. However, peer review does not prevent publication of invalid research, and as experimentally controlled studies of this process are difficult to arrange, direct evidence that peer review improves the quality of published papers is scarce.
</p>

Scholarly peer review open-in-new

Scholarly peer review