We are now halfway through Peer Review Week and so we wanted to take this opportunity to thank every one of you who has acted as a peer reviewer across our entire portfolio of journals. It is an understatement to say that we could not do what we do without you all.

Thousands of reviewers have given their time and expertise in refereeing for Royal Society Publishing during the years since our inception. So far, more than 900 reviewers have contributed to Biology Letters alone in 2016. We asked some of the top referees about their experience of peer review and this is what they had to say…


Guy Beauchamp

“I have performed peer reviews for Biology Letters since the launch of the journal and have done so for other Royal Society journals as well. Reviewing these papers allows me to keep in touch with the latest research on my favourite topics. Given the high quality of most papers submitted there, it is always a pleasure to perform the reviews. I was considered a top reviewer for Biology Letters and Proceedings of the Royal Society B, and this recognition clearly shows that my work is appreciated, which always helps when considering whether to review the next papers sent my way.”


Alexandra Gavryushkina

“I have been very happy with my reviewing experience for Biology Letters. The Editors were constructive and carefully considered my reviews. In general I would stress the role peer reviewers have in improving the presentation of research articles. Reviewers give authors necessary feedback in terms of ‘what the audience capture from an article’, ‘are all the statements clear and unambiguous’ and so on, which makes the articles more readable.”


Per Ahlberg

“Peer review is a critically important component of the scientific process, and I am always happy to do it insofar as time allows. I have never asked for or been offered any formal recognition, but for me at least that is very much a secondary consideration: what really matters is the opportunity to help the authors improve their manuscripts and – just as important – to stop ill-founded interpretations and bad arguments from making it into the literature. Being allowed to be part of the quality control process for science is a privilege as much as a duty.”


Through updated guidelines, new methods to recognise reviewers and the development of user-friendly technologies, the peer review process continues to evolve in ways that we hope are beneficial to our referees, authors and readers. As ever we will continue to inform and feedback on these changes right here on our blog.

Thank you for taking time to read our posts about Peer Review Week, and special thanks go to our contributors. Please feel free to continue the conversation as the week goes on using the comments section below.

In the meantime, happy peer reviewing!


Comments are closed.