The editors are looking for very specific in the reviewers or peers. These qualities include that the peer should have expertise on the subject, have clear objectivity and there should be no conflicts of interest.

The peer should have clear and good capability to make correct judgment, should be able to think clearly and logically, be able to write a good critique, be accurate, readable and helpful to editors and authors.

The peer should be reliable reviewing the manuscript within the allotted time frame and should be quick in returning reviews.

Although reviewers are generally blinded while reviewing the manuscripts to provide critical and honest reviews and often the reviewer’s identity is not released to authors or third parties but sometimes despite all these concealments and blinding the reviewers know the authors and vice versa.

While reviewing a manuscript the peer should see if the work done in the research is similar or very close to his/her own work.

For example does the paper contain experiments that overlap with those you are performing, planning, or preparing for publication; if yes then decline to review the manuscript to avoid the charges of conflict of interest and misconduct.

Also make every effort to avoid receiving the full paper, as this would further lead you to misconduct on ethics.

If by any chance you receive the full paper then return it immediately and discuss this problem with editor.

As a peer if there is conflict of interest or you do not have to review then you cannot pass the paper to someone else to review on your own.

Always discuss with the editor and permission from the editor before doing this.

Peer Review System