Guidelines for ReviewersPLOS ONE relies on members of the scientific research community to assess the validity of articles under consideration through peer review. Show
Invitation to ReviewPLOS ONE editors select potential reviewers based on their expertise in research areas relevant to the manuscript under consideration. Reviewer invitations are sent by email from the journal's Editorial Manager submission system. Use the links in the invitation email to accept or decline, or check the “New Reviewer Invitations” folder on your Reviewer Main Menu screen in Editorial Manager. Accept an invitation only if you have the knowledge, time and objectivity necessary to provide an unbiased assessment of the research. In agreeing to complete a review, you also give permission to publish your review under a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY license. Our Peer Review ProcessPLOS ONE practices single-blind peer review by default, but offers opportunities for authors and reviewers to participate in signed and published peer review. Our peer review model
Best practices for reviewers
Receiving creditIn choosing to volunteer as a peer reviewer for PLOS, you are helping to support free and open access to rigorous research. We couldn’t be more grateful!
How to Submit a Peer Review in Editorial ManagerPLOS ONE uses a structured reviewer form to help reviewers focus on our publication criteria and improve the efficiency of peer review. Preview the form. The form contains two sections: Comments to the authorAnswers to the questions in this section are required and will be included in the decision letter to the author. For questions 1-4 select a response from the drop down (e.g., “Yes,” “No,” “I don't know,” “N/A”) and provide any details you wish. Enter the main text of your peer review in question 5, “Review Comments to the Author.” Comments to the editorUse this section to declare any potential or perceived competing interests. You’ll also have the option to list anyone who collaborated with you on the peer review, and indicate whether you think the submission should be highlighted on the PLOS ONE webpage if it goes on to be published. This will not play any role in the editorial decision-making process or be shared with the authors. PLOS ONE does not allow confidential comments other than the declaration of competing interests. If you have confidential concerns relating to publication or research ethics, please contact us at . Reviews must be entered in the submission system. Email the journal office if you are having trouble accessing the manuscript or entering your comments. Helpful Resources
Reviewing Registered ReportsRegistered Reports are primary research articles in which the methods and proposed analyses are peer reviewed prior to conducting experiments, data collection or analysis. The PLOS ONE publication criteria apply to Registered Reports as they would to any other research submitted to the journal, but the peer review process is slightly different. Assessment takes place in two stages and, if accepted, results in two linked publications.
Reviewing Lab ProtocolsLab Protocols describe reusable methodologies for experimental and computational techniques.They typically consist of a protocol on the protocols.io platform and a PLOS ONE manuscript that contextualizes it, but authors can elect to publish on protocols.io after manuscript submission. The PLOS ONE publication criteria apply to Lab Protocols as they would to any other research submitted to the journal, but the peer review process is generally expedited and typically carried out by one internal Academic Editor and one external reviewer. Lab Protocols are eligible for both signed and published peer review. You will review the manuscript, while referencing the protocol on protocols.io or in PDF format as a supplementary information file. Peer review aims to ensure that the manuscript complies with the submission guidelines and publication criteria for Lab Protocols. Consider:
Reviewing Study ProtocolsStudy Protocols describe detailed plans and proposals for research projects that have not yet generated results. They consist of a single article on PLOS ONE that can be referenced in future research. The PLOS ONE publication criteria apply to Study Protocols as they would to any other research submitted to the journal. Study Protocols are eligible for both signed and published peer review. Study Protocols submitted with proof of ethics approval (if required) and external funding by a funder that has independently peer reviewed the protocol are typically accepted without further external peer review. If, however, the journal staff decide that further review is necessary, reviewers will be invited to ensure that the Study Protocol complies with the submission guidelines and publication criteria Consider:
Writing the reviewThe purpose of the review is to provide the editors with an expert opinion regarding the validity and quality of the manuscript under consideration. The review should also supply authors with explicit feedback on how to improve their papers so that they will be acceptable for publication in PLOS ONE. As you write, consider the following points:
Although confidential comments to the editors are respected, any remarks that might help to strengthen the paper should be directed to the authors themselves. RevisionsWe often ask the original reviewers to evaluate revised manuscripts and the authors’ response to reviewer comments. We hope that you’ll make yourself available for re-review and questions from the editors. Editing reviewers’ reportsThe editors and PLOS staff will not change any reviewer comments that are intended for authors to read, except with reviewer approval prior to the decision letter being sent. For example, we may request changes if language is deemed inappropriate for professional communication, or if the comments contain information considered confidential, such as competing interest declarations. The Editorial ProcessDecision processThe editors make the final decision on whether to publish each submission based on the reviewers’ comments, the PLOS ONE criteria for publication, and their own assessment of the manuscript. Conflicting reviewsIf reviewers appear to disagree fundamentally, the editors may choose to share all the reviews with each of the reviewers and request additional comments that may help the editors to reach a decision. Decisions are not necessarily made according to majority rule. Experts may disagree, and it is the job of the Editor to make a decision. Editors evaluate reviewer recommendations and comments alongside comments by the authors and material that may not have been made available to reviewers. Please know that your recommendation has been duly considered and your service is appreciated, even if the final decision does not accord with your review. More on our Editorial Process. HelpFor more tips on peer review go to the Reviewer Center, and sign up to the Peer Review Toolbox. If you have questions or concerns about the manuscript you are reviewing, or if you need assistance submitting the review, please email us . |