With increased demands on publications, it can be difficult for Editors to identify high-quality Reviewers. A quick poll we recently conducted suggested that a candidate’s review history was the most important factor considered when selecting a Reviewer.
Understandably, knowing whether a candidate has reviewed before, with which publication and when, certainly sways an Editor’s decision. In Editorial Manager, Reviewers can receive attribution for their participation on their ORCID records if the journal they are submitting to uses ORCID Peer Review Deposit functionality. With review history displayed on ORCID records, confirming the review history of a candidate becomes easier for journals.
Other factors listed in the poll and voted upon were:
- Candidate has been published
- Candidate’s academic degree or institution
- Candidate’s number of citations
An Editor may also consider the candidate’s level of expertise on the subject, if they are still active in that particular field, and if they are likely to be available to take on the task based on probable prior commitments. How does your journal office approach selecting Reviewers? Aries is interested to know! Get in touch and share your preferences.