{"id":104179,"date":"2018-09-06T10:25:43","date_gmt":"2018-09-06T09:25:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/?p=104179"},"modified":"2025-06-30T19:24:56","modified_gmt":"2025-06-30T19:24:56","slug":"6-tips-to-secure-a-peer-review-invitation-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/blog\/6-tips-to-secure-a-peer-review-invitation-2\/","title":{"rendered":"6 tips to secure a peer review invitation"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em>It\u2019s not easy breaking into the world of peer review. It often requires publishing articles and then waiting for editors to contact you. That\u2019s a slow process for early-career researchers, who want to put their foot on the accelerator and benefit from everything peer review has to offer. Luckily, it\u2019s not the only approach, as Immunologist\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/publons.com\/author\/1368822\/qinjie-chelsea-zhou#profile\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Chelsea Qinjie Zhou<\/a>\u00a0soon discovered.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Chelsea, a postdoctoral fellow at\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.hopkinsmedicine.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Johns Hopkins School of Medicine<\/a>, USA, isn\u2019t one to sit around waiting for opportunities to come to her. With a go-getter attitude, she meticulously tried different options to secure peer review invitations from top editors in her field &#8211; and has contributed a guest post to help other early-career researchers follow suit (the fast way!).<\/p>\n<p>Why heed Chelsea\u2019s advice? Easy: you\u2019ll become a better researcher for doing so.<\/p>\n<p>Peer review provides opportunities to see the latest research trends, learn what journals are looking for in a great manuscript, make professional connections with journal editors, and develop your critical analysis skills.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h4 id=\"chelseasstorysecuringapeerreviewinvitation\">Chelsea\u2019s story: Securing a peer review invitation<\/h4>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-104180 alignright\" style=\"padding-left: 25px;\" src=\"http:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2021\/07\/Screen-Shot-2018-09-06-at-1.53.33-PM-1.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"150\" height=\"147\" srcset=\"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2021\/07\/Screen-Shot-2018-09-06-at-1.53.33-PM-1.png 150w, https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2021\/07\/Screen-Shot-2018-09-06-at-1.53.33-PM-1-41x40.png 41w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 150px) 100vw, 150px\" \/>I was three years into my postdoc fellowship when I started looking to peer review for career progression. In the first few weeks, I just googled general tips and sent random emails to the journals where I have published before. It was not working. Therefore I decided to take it seriously and adopt a systemic approach.<\/p>\n<p>Firstly I joined the\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/publons.com\/blog\/6-tips-to-secure-a-peer-review-invitation\/www.publons.com\/community\/academy\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Publons Academy<\/a>\u00a0program to have a better sense of what peer review was all about. With a credential from Publons, I figured my capability to conduct a quality review with &#8220;almost zero&#8221; experience could be justified.<\/p>\n<p>After finishing the program, I started drafting cold emails and sent to journals of relevance in large volume. I included my area of expertise, the articles I\u2019d published, and my supervisor\u2019s endorsement from the Publons Academy. I carried the motto &#8220;quantity trumps quality,&#8221; i.e., sending 20-30 copies of almost-the-same-email, batch by batch, with the title &#8220;peer review opportunity inquiry.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"blockquote\">\n<p class=\"mb-0\">I carried the motto &#8220;quantity trumps quality,&#8221; i.e., sending 20-30 copies of almost-the-same-email, batch by batch, with the title &#8220;peer review opportunity inquiry.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>I received almost zero replies. Less than 5% of the editors I\u2019d reached out to came back to me stating, &#8220;Thanks for your email, we will keep you in mind&#8221;. This approach was not optimal.<\/p>\n<p>I started to adopt a &#8220;seeking advice\u201d approach with a humble and genuine tone as an early career researcher (ECR). I wrote to different editors and said I was looking for suggestions as to how to get more peer review opportunities. I did get a few replies, but honestly, the strategy was still suboptimal given it highlighted my weakness as ECR. Some professors replied, &#8220;Focus on good work, publish more papers, you will get there&#8230;&#8221;. Nevertheless, I did get some great advice including:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>sign up to the journal&#8217;s database, which is the very means editors are taking to seek potential reviewers; and<\/li>\n<li>conduct co-review with senior scientists.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>I decided to pause on the cold email approach and focus on signing up to journals\u2019 databases. My steps were to:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Analyse Publons&#8217; list of collaborating journals and find those in my field<\/li>\n<li>Go to the journal\u2019s website<\/li>\n<li>Select &#8220;Submit paper&#8221;<\/li>\n<li>Create an account<\/li>\n<li>Edit my bio with relevant keywords<\/li>\n<li>Select &#8220;available to be the reviewer&#8221;<\/li>\n<li>Move on to the next journal.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Two weeks in, I got one invitation. It was encouraging, however, as a scientist, I could not bear an approach that relies solely on randomness to break into peer review.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"blockquote\">\n<p class=\"mb-0\">Two weeks in, I got one invitation. It was encouraging, however, as a scientist, I could not bear an approach that relies solely on randomness to break into peer review.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>I decided to combine the above approaches and personalize the cold emails I had been sending. Rather than go to random journals, I started with the publishers to make sure I had relative comprehensive coverage for all journals possible. For example, I would go to the SAGE website, check all the journals relevant to my field, and create my account for each of them. Then I would email the associated editors, check their research interests, find the common ground we shared and finetune my email accordingly. Instead of coming from a lower stand as ECR, I changed the tone to &#8220;volunteering for reviewing&#8221; (hard to reject volunteers&#8230;) and highlight all the journals I have reviewed for so far.<\/p>\n<p>Along the way, I also followed the advice to co-review with senior scientists.<\/p>\n<p>The reality is, I had very limited co-reviews with my advisor. Given the policy of confidentiality and rounds of disclosures, he would let me help only if the journal had the option of &#8220;did anyone in your group help with the review, if so please specify.&#8221; The bright side? I got two high profile co-reviews which I highlighted in my inquiry email.<\/p>\n<p>One important thing I have to highlight here is, I also nicely &#8220;complained&#8221; to Publons about the frustrations. Julia (Head of the Publons Academy) emailed me back personally several times giving suggestions and also to connect me to journals they collaborated with. I am very grateful for the support (thank you!).<\/p>\n<p>As invitations slowly came in, I started to shift my focus to producing quality reviews. It could very likely be a trust-building process: since I have started performing peer reviews, invitations continue to come in from the same journals.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"blockquote\">\n<p class=\"mb-0\">As invitations slowly came in, I started to shift my focus to producing quality reviews.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Moving forward, I would like to share a few tips for ECR as PR seekers which you may not find at any other sites (yes I did exhaust the google research in the first place):<\/p>\n<h4 id=\"6tipstobreakintotheworldofpeerreview\">6 tips to break into the world of peer review<\/h4>\n<ol>\n<li>Cold emailing and signing up for journals\u2019 paper-submission-database was so far the most effective method to secure peer review invitations: It&#8217;s a number&#8217;s game.<\/li>\n<li>It is time-consuming so systemize your approach to save some sunk time. Also, continually refine your strategy based on the feedback you receive;<\/li>\n<li>Customize your email to &#8220;associate editors&#8221; to include keywords grasping his\/her attention; also make sure you can find his\/her contact first (sometimes it feels like cyberstalking&#8230;);<\/li>\n<li>Ask your colleagues around for co-review and review referring, but don&#8217;t rely on it;<\/li>\n<li>Once you have one or two invitations coming in, quality is the key. This is where the Publons Academy helps the most. It&#8217;s less about the badge or a credential and more about quality control to show you are a qualified and even preferred candidate for peer review. Quality work has compounding factors built-in;<\/li>\n<li>Be attentive and proactive about accepting and producing quality reviews in a timely manner;<br \/>\nWhen frustration shows up, treat it as a cyber game; you will get there for sure. Why not treat it as a fun challenge and be a little creative to figure out how to get there quickest?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>With the all the above, I hope everyone who reads this can get something out of it. Good luck!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It\u2019s not easy breaking into the world of peer review. It often requires publishing articles and then waiting for editors to contact you. That\u2019s a slow process for early-career researchers,&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":104181,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[20,22,88],"class_list":["post-104179","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-academia-government","tag-peer-review","tag-practical-guide","tag-researchers"],"acf":[],"lang":"en","translations":{"en":104179},"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"pll_sync_post":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104179","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=104179"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104179\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":287449,"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104179\/revisions\/287449"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/104181"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=104179"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=104179"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clarivate.com\/academia-government\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=104179"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}