New publication review

Reviewer selection guidelines

The purpose of ANR peer review is to bring the same intellectual rigor to ANR publications as is expected of peer-refereed journal articles. Although ANR publications are not original research, the commitment by authors, reviewers, and Associate Editors to appropriate, rigorous, qualified review of ANR manuscripts should be no less than that brought to academic journals.

To support this goal, Associate Editors have identified a number of considerations for peer reviewer selection. Please note that the term “publication” as used here includes ANR educational materials in many formats.

• Inaccurate or incorrect ANR publications have the potential to do harm. Peer reviewers should be thoughtfully selected to assure that ANR publications are of the best possible quality.
• Reviewers should be fluent in the subject matter of the publication.
• Reviewers should be qualified to assess the appropriateness of a publication to its intended audience and use.
• Thought should be given to the independence of a given reviewer’s perspective. While close academic or organizational affiliation should not automatically exclude an otherwise qualified reviewer, the AE should consider these factors.
• Review of materials should be anonymous.
• Where appropriate, Associate Editors may require a “double-blind” review and withhold the author’s name from reviewers.
• Where possible, a UC campus-based specialist or faculty member should be included as a reviewer.
• Where possible, a qualified reviewer from outside the UC system is encouraged.
• Number of reviewers should be appropriate to the publication. Suggestions for numbers of reviewers are included [link tk].
• Review standards and reviewer selection and guidance should be consistent between AEs.
• When questions concerning appropriate reviewers or subject matter expertise arise, AEs are encouraged to discuss and consult with the AE Chair and their fellow AEs in other subject matter areas as necessary.