What is a peer pre-review?
A peer pre-review is similar to a peer review for a scholarly journal but faster and often more constructive. Our reviewers - generally ladder faculty at peer institutions with relevant expertise - are expected to read the entire research document (i.e., paper, grant, or pre-registration report) and make constructive suggestions throughout. This can include some or all of the following, but participants may also submit the questions they would like reviewers to focus on:
- Can you rephrase the research question, or the overall pitch of the document, so it will better resonate with the public and academic audiences, be more impactful overall, or better support the strengths of the document?
- Is the theory/argument in the document appropriate to the research question and findings? Is it plausible and interesting? Can it be improved?
- Has the author identified the document’s weaknesses? Does the author convincingly address the potential bias or other damage from these weaknesses? Could this be improved?
- What is the best publication strategy for the study? For example, should findings be reported in single or multiple papers? Which journal(s) would make an appropriate home for the paper(s)?
- If your document includes empirical methods, are they implemented appropriately? Could they be improved or replaced with something better?
- Can the language, mathematical notation, arguments, or visualizations be improved so the document more effectively communicates to its intended audience?
- Do the figures or tables convey the most important points in the document most effectively? Can they be improved?
- Could better data sources, theories, or literature improve the document?
