Peer Review Week 2024: 96% of reviewers rate their experience as ‘Good’ or ‘Excellent’
23 September 2024
The Microbiology Society highly values the contributions of our reviewers, who play a critical role in ensuring the quality and integrity of the research published in our journals. To better understand their experiences and motivations, in July 2024 we sent out a survey to our reviewers from the last 3 years. We received over 300 responses and this Peer Review Week we are happy to share that the results are both encouraging, insightful and will help shape the future of reviewing at the Society.
Here are the key findings from the survey:
High reviewer satisfaction
96% of respondents rather their experience reviewing with us as either ‘Good’ or ‘Excellent’.
“Overall, I felt that I could write a thorough and constructive review, and that the editor took my comments seriously” – Reviewer, Microbial Genomics
“All the journals I regularly review for have very high standards and professionalism” – Reviewer, Microbiology, Internation Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, Journal of Medical Microbiology.
Strong engagement beyond reviewing
70% of reviewers have also submitted their work to one or more of our journals. Furthermore, 33% of reviewers have been recipients of one of our grants or have attended a Microbiology Society event.
“I feel part of a community” – Reviewer, Journal of General Virology
“Working for the benefit of the society is very good, and is why I give support as reviewer, author and editor” – Reviewer, Microbial Genomics
Motivations for reviewing
The survey revealed that the most motivating factor is ‘interest in the journal’ they are reviewing for. This was closely followed by a desire to ‘support the activities of the Microbiology Society’. On the flip side, the least motivating factor for reviewing was the prospect of receiving ‘in-kind benefits’ such as APC discounts or cash rewards.
“Reviewer requests are well matched with my interests and expertise” – Reviewer, Journal of Medical Microbiology
“The selection of manuscripts that fits in my personal field is somewhat better than from other journals. So the editors do good work” – Reviewer, Microbiology & Journal of Medical Microbiology
Helpful reviewer guidelines
Finally, we are pleased to report that the majority of respondents found our reviewer guidelines to be useful in navigating the peer-review process. We will continue to review and update these as and when our reviewing process evolves.
Thank you to all those that have completed our survey and reviewed for our journals. Reviewers are essential to our work as a not-for-profit organization: supporting our publications allow us to continue providing microbiologists of all career stages with grants, events and professional development opportunities. One article published with us generates the revenue to give grants to four early career members to attend our Annual Conference.