Main Article Content
Peer review is a hallmark of scientific publishing, yet finding peers to conduct reviews is increasingly challenging. Some attribute this challenge to the “tragedy of the referee commons,” wherein selfish behaviors related to the publication of scientific manuscripts lead to unsustainable use of potential referees and a reduction in the quality of scientific publications. To address the tragedy and maintain the quality of scientific publications, we could increase the degree to which junior referees are involved in the peer review process. Because these potential referees often have limited relevant experience and limited access to useful resources, we have developed a guide to reviewing manuscripts submitted for publication in journals that focus on conservation, ecology, or evolution. Herein, we provide an overview of the peer review process, discuss the role of junior reviewers in this process, and discuss how reviews should be conducted. This guide can serve to train both new and junior referees as well as to provide a refresher for senior referees.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).