Reviewers informing review process and criteria

Involving reviewers in reviewing assessment processes and criteria can help building assessment processes that target the intended outcomes by keeping realistic and achievable objectives and by giving reviewers – who are often reviewed themselves on other occasions – a voice in the process.
Level 0
Aim: Inclusivity
Aim: Diversity
Aim: Collaboration
Aim: Alternative questions
Aim: Value process
CoARA Commitment 1
CoARA Commitment 2
CoARA Commitment 6
CoARA Commitment 8
Target: Funder
Target: Academic institution
Target: Scholarly association
Target: Research group
Target: Individual scholar
Target: Meta-researcher
Target: Editor and publisher
Contributor

Experiments in Assessment WG

Publication date

April 9, 2026

Updated

April 28, 2026

WarningObjectives and potential outcome
  • Reflect on the impacts that current research assessment may have on researchers and research practices.
  • Adapt assessment processes
  • Avoid negative unintended consequences

Research domains

This assessment can fit in any domain where reviewers are assigned to assess applications or outputs. These could be peer reviewers for scientific outputs and achievements, reviewers for hiring, promotion, and recognition processes, or reviewers for funding applications.

Context and considerations

Challenges and mitigations

Evaluating success

Relevant resources and literature

Templates from funders and institutions

Case examples and literature

Health Research Board (Ireland) did a series of evaluations of the narrative style CV in which they targeted, amongst other things, the perspective and experiences of reviewers in assessing the narrative style CV. These evaluations directly informed the CV’s content and deployment in funding programme applications.

Other resources

Case Studies or Implementation Examples

Many case studies of organisations and groups that used the SCOPE framework are available at https://inorms.net/scope-framework-for-research-evaluation/.