Among their many responsibilities, editors say that finding & retaining qualified reviewers is one of the most challenging. We spoke to Egbert van Wezenbeek, Director Publication Process Development, about how Elsevier is helping, and what improvements are expected in the future.

“Editors are searching, not just for available reviewers, but more importantly for those with the right expertise who are qualified to review the particular papers at hand,” van Wezenbeek explains. “That means scientists in that particular field of study, with knowledge and expertise in the subject matter. That search can be long and difficult.”

To lighten the load, van Wezenbeek and his team are exploring ways to simplify and streamline the reviewer search process. They are exploring ways to create a search tool specifically designed for identifying qualified reviewers matching a particular paper and, from there, being able to start up invitation to review.

Focusing on efficiency
“We’re trying to reduce the number of steps to arrive at accurate reviewer search results,” van Wezenbeek continues. “We need the wealth of information that a system like Scopus provides, and combine this with the ease of use and efficiency of EES.”

One possibility is to add a specially designed search tool to EES itself (see related article,   here). By extending the scope of EES to include reviewer finding and selection, Editors will be able to increase their lists of qualified reviewers, and the reviewers themselves can benefit from a more streamlined process as well.

“A reviewer finding tool also opens the door to discussions on additional functionality,” van Wezenbeek says. “For example, if we can track the number of papers that each scientist is currently reviewing, we can avoid multiple requests to one reviewer, while others have very few. Authors benefit from this: a higher acceptance to review rate will expedite the peer review process. Finally, the possibility to track a scientist’s reviewing history could also prove to be helpful.”

Van Wezenbeek says that although the project is in the beginning phases, it is considered a high priority in the department – as it is for journal editors.

The longer term
A second challenge comes once the desired reviewers are found. How do we keep them reviewing? What tools are in place to help editors ensure their reviewers will want to review again?

“There are things editors can do, both before and after the review process, to help maintain reviewer satisfaction,” van Wezenbeek continues. “Through technical screening and an initial editorial review, many journals are able to greatly reduce the number of papers to enter the peer review process that do not meet up to the basic scientific, style or subject matter standards of the journal.”

In some cases, language polishing is a third level of control that can help ensure that reviewers are receiving the best possible work. “That way, the reviewers can simply focus on the science of the paper.”

Elsevier also offers ways to recognize, and even reward, reviewers. This begins with free, 30-day access to Scopus and Science Direct to all reviewers. But it continues with annual lists of contributing reviewers in an increasing number of journals and other forms of recognition, such as systems to reward reviewers when they review a certain number of papers.

“The key is to provide our editors with as many tools and resources possible to ensure that they are attracting and keeping the best reviewers. We’re working towards improvements at every step in the process to make that happen.” 

To cite this article, please use: Toni Bellanca, “Targeting relevant reviewers”, Elsevier Editors’ Update, Issue 27, August 2009

Useful Links
  How to find & keep reviewers (PDF)