More early career researchers are stepping up to peer review

“Without it, we can’t really validate scientific research and discoveries," she said. It is incredibly essential to maintaining research integrity — to know that what researchers and scientists are using to apply to solve world problems has been validated by their peers.”

Peer reviewing is a skill that takes time, guidance and experience to master. So what persuades these two ECRs to find time in their busy schedules to take on this additional work?

Both spoke of the rewards peer reviewing offers them, including honing their writing, communication and critiquing skills; gaining insights into how to improve their own papers; building new networks; and contributing to the wider scientific community.

As ECRs doing peer review, Wilson and Inês are not alone: More researchers are taking on peer review earlier in their careers opens in new tab/window.

Of course, finding the time for it is only one of various challenges. For example, reviewing requires subject expertise and keeping up with the latest research. It also requires skills in writing and science communication. And reviewers must be objective and provide feedback constructively.

Still, ECRs see reviewing as a way to broaden their skills, experience and networks. And publishers and editors welcome the opportunity to work with younger researchers, saying they bring various positive attributes to the table.

An example of a successful ECR development program

Skills, networking and career benefits for ECRs

Wilson and Inês have both experienced various benefits from their work as peer reviewers

“When I was a PhD student, I found that reviewing papers really helped me understand what was at the forefront of the field,” Wilson said. “Because these are works that are still in progress, you get to be the first to see it, other than obviously the authors. And I really like contributing early on to the publication process and helping to understand where the field is going, as well as maybe contributing to the research integrity and rigor of the field.”

Also, as an author, Wilson has sometimes found himself flummoxed by the comments on his papers from reviewers. “I don’t quite know how to address those comments,” he admitted.

Being a reviewer himself has helped him learn how to respond: “I correspond with authors from the other side," he said. “I learn the approaches, the semantics and the way you word things in a professional and academic setting — how to alleviate some of the reviewers’ concerns and comments. That certainly helps, and practice makes perfect.”

Before he joined the board, understanding the publishing process was a challenge for Wilson. He described it as “kind of like a black box.” The Young Investigators program gave him a chance to learn more about the process and develop his own writing skills. “I might publish two, three papers a year at most, but when you’re reviewing, you get to look at a whole lot more papers than that,” he said. “And so you get to practice written and analytical skills more.”

It’s also likely to benefit his chances of tenure, he said.

For Inês, reviewing the work of her peers opened her eyes to the potential for improving her own work: “I said, ok, I’m not doing this the best way. Maybe I need to change this, or maybe I need to qualify this.”

In addition, she has found that reviewing gives her clear examples of how to develop her communication and report writing skills.

Peer reviewing has also given her opportunities to build networks beyond her own university and meet other scientists as well as deepening her connections in the smaller community of her scientific interests.

Ultimately, Inês said the process benefits reviewers as well as authors.

She sees longer-term benefits for the science community as well: “This also increases the visibility of the scientists and also strengthens our credibility,” she said, “because if we are doing good work for the journal, then we are serving the community in a positive way.”

Diversity of gender, geography and generation

From a publisher’s perspective, the diversity offered by early career researchers is a boon to the journal.

“I’m a firm believer that the more diverse your editorial board is as a whole, the richer your content that’s going to go into that journal and the richer your author base is going to be,” said Katie. “It can be diversity of gender, it can be diversity of geography — but then it’s also about generational diversity.”

For the ECRs, having close contact with members of the editorial board can be immensely helpful when it comes to getting their first papers published.

“Most journals have a 70 to 80 percent rejection rate,” she said. “But when you partner with the right journal — the right community to learn from — it’s a huge plus to get them going and to learn all they can.”

ECRs can also use that community to find advice about research and connections for future collaboration, she added.

Being part of the journal is also an opportunity to learn about scholarly publishing and best writing practices. Early career researchers are not necessarily excellent writers, Katie noted:

“To have a mentor in the journal that is exposing them to articles and what looks good, and here’s what to do and not do, and here’s what a good abstract looks like, and don’t do this, this is against research integrity — it’s invaluable for them to learn all these things. They’re not going to learn those things in their lab research.”

Finding opportunities

While the European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics Young Investigators program is no longer accepting new members, you can seek out similar programs and opportunities. Meanwhile, there are various opportunities to build your reviewing skills.

• Elsevier offers a Certified Peer Reviewer Course opens in new tab/window through its Research Academy.

• You can find more about peer reviewing — including the following tips — on Elsevier’s Reviewers Hub