Peer review means different things to different people. You wouldn’t do the same task for an academic journal article as you would if a colleague asks to check something quickly.
So how do you make sure your peer review is helpful for the writer who asked for it? Read on to solve the mystery!
Start with some detective work
You may have been asked to ‘check’ some writing. Or to ‘have a quick look’. Or to ‘edit and proofread’. Or just to ‘tell me what you think’.
Before you do anything else, clarify what the writer wants from you. Editing and proofreading are different tasks that happen later in the process. Usually peer review is when a colleague or subject-matter expert assesses whether the content is fit for purpose. So if you’re a great speller who knows nothing about the topic, you may not be the best person to do the peer review.
How final is the content? Is it a progress check, or have they spent hours refining the content and are just seeking reassurance that they’ve done a good job? If you go in and start editing furiously, it may not be what they wanted from you at all.
How do they want you to give feedback? Check whether they’d like to discuss it, or for you to add comments to the document, or to summarise feedback in an email. Sorting this out at the start can help the process go smoothly.
Look for clues
What do you know about the writer? Are they an expert on this topic, or do you know more about it? Do they feel strongly about it, or do they want to hear a different opinion?
Check on the purpose of the document and what the writer wants to achieve. Does the content support this? Look for a logical flow of information, with informative headings that act as ‘signposts’ along the way.
Present your case (tactfully)
Be respectful of the work the writer has invested in their draft. Often it’s more diplomatic to suggest things in comments than to demolish the text with multiple tracked changes. If you think the text isn’t fit for purpose, it may be best to discuss this with the writer. If you want to make drastic changes, particularly restructuring, we’d definitely recommend talking to the writer and suggesting your alternative ideas.
Although it may be tempting to just get stuck in and ‘fix it’ yourself, the writer won’t learn anything about writing this way. It may also put them off seeking peer review in future. Think about giving constructive, helpful feedback that acknowledges the work they have put into it.
Radical editing also discourages writers from trying to write well themselves. If you know someone else will fix it for you, you lose the incentive to make the draft as good as you can. So try to leave revisions in the writer’s hands rather than taking over. ‘Peer review’ means asking a colleague to give you feedback, not to take the document over, after all!
Mystery solved
It’s not really a mystery after all. But we hope this has helped to clear up some of the misconceptions about peer review. See it as an opportunity to help your colleagues, not to show that you could do a better job. The two key words are ‘respectful’ and ‘helpful’. Remember those, and you’ll be a peer reviewer people want to work with.