In short: Fair peer review depends on the editor: choosing the right independent reviewers, giving them clear guidance, protecting confidentiality, weighing their reports critically, and handling problems even-handedly. Done well, it is what makes a journal trustworthy.
The editor's responsibility
An editor does not merely collect reviews — they design and safeguard a fair process. This work sits at the centre of a journal's editorial policies and its credibility, and it follows the COPE Core Practices.
Selecting the right reviewers
- Expertise — choose reviewers with genuine knowledge of the manuscript's subject and methods.
- Independence — avoid close collaborators, direct competitors, or anyone with a competing interest; ask reviewers to disclose conflicts and decline where appropriate.
- Balance — seek complementary perspectives (for example, methodological and subject expertise), and aim for at least two independent reviewers for research articles.
Managing the process fairly
- Give reviewers clear instructions and the criteria to assess.
- Set reasonable timelines and follow up courteously — without pressuring reviewers into rushed judgements.
- Protect confidentiality: manuscripts and reviews are privileged and must not be shared or used for personal advantage.
- In a blinded model, ensure files are properly anonymised.
Weighing reports and deciding
Read the reviews critically rather than simply counting recommendations. Where reviewers disagree, resolve the conflict with judgement or an additional opinion. The decision rests with the editor and must be based on scholarly merit, independent of commercial interests and never contingent on an author's ability to pay a charge. (See how editorial decisions are made.)
Handling problems
- Poor or biased reviews — give them less weight, seek another opinion, and feed back to the reviewer.
- Ethical concerns — act on suspected misconduct or integrity issues, following COPE flowcharts.
- Appeals and complaints — handle fairly, via an editor not involved in the original decision.
Reviewers who want to understand what is expected of them can read our reviewer guidelines.
Key takeaways
- Choose independent, expert reviewers and manage conflicts of interest.
- Give clear guidance, reasonable timelines and strict confidentiality.
- Weigh reports critically; the decision is the editor's, on merit.
- Handle poor reviews, ethical concerns and appeals fairly, per COPE.