Recognition of peer Review

Recognition of peer review treats reviewing as a measurable scholarly contribution. It enhances transparency and accountability, incentivizes high-quality evaluations, and integrates review activity into research assessment systems—acknowledging its essential role in maintaining research integrity, community service, and the advancement of disciplinary standards.
Level 1
Aim: Recognition
Aim: Inclusivity
Aim: Bias mitigation
Aim: Value process
CoARA Commitment 1
CoARA Commitment 2
CoARA Commitment 6
CoARA Commitment 7
Target: Editor and publisher
Target: Academic Institution
Target: Funder
Target: Meta-Researcher
Contributor

Experiments in Assessment WG

Publication date

April 9, 2026

Updated

April 20, 2026

WarningObjectives and potential outcome
  • Enhance transparency and accountability
  • Incentivize high-quality evaluations
  • Integrate review activity into research assessment systems
  • Acknowledging the essential role of peer review in maintaining research integrity, community service, and the advancement of disciplinary standards

Research domains

Recognition of peer review can target journal peer-review, book review, thesis review, conference abstract review, grant application review, as well as general assessment review (e.g., hiring, tenure, promotion, sholarship, awards, etc).

Context and considerations

Challenges and mitigations

Challenge: if peer review is only acknowledged numerically, there is a risk that it becomes a quantitative metric devoid of meaning.
Mitigation: Finding different ways of making peer review more open (see related idea) would bring more qualitative elements to the peer review recognition, on top of increasing the openness and enabling more learning and research opportunities from the reviews process.

Evaluating success

Relevant resources and literature

This section includes resources, literature, and reports relevant to this specific experimental idea.

Templates from funders and institutions

Case examples and literature

Several peer reviewed journals now offer peer reviewers the option to have their peer review acknowledged on ORCID or on the Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service, formerly Publons. In many cases, publishers also offer discount on Article Publishing Charges for peer reviewers, although this practice is generally thought of as an incentive which in itself does not necessarily generate academic recognition.

See for example the dedicated page from Wiley, in which they explain that peer reviewers can also claim Continuing Medical Education (CME) Credits, and that they can receive Reviewer Recognition Certificates. The BMJ has a similar system, adding also a public mention of reviewers’ names shared on an annual list of reviewers where the BMJ group expresses thanks to peer reviewers for their “contribution to maintaining the quality of research literature”. Similar systems are in place at most publishers, with some adding their distinctions. For instance, IOPscience also has dedicated ways to recognise peer reviewers through Trusted Reviewer status and Outstanding Reviewer Awards, on top of ensuring that peer reviews are acknowledges on the Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service.

Funders are also starting to recognise peer review, for example, UKRI now offers peer reviewer recognition through ORCID.

Other resources

Case Studies or Implementation Examples