Review Guidelines

Every research article has to undergo peer review before it is published in an academic journal or presented at a research conference. Consequently, review writing is an integral part of the scientific process and a common duty in your work as a researcher.

To give you an opportunity for practicing your review writing skills, we expect you to read carefully two papers of other BREW participants and to write a review for both papers. We selected papers for you to review that are thematically close to your own paper and will send out review requests via email. Please do not share the manuscripts because most of the results are not published yet.

Your two reviews should have up to 2 pages and should be structured into 4 sections:

  • Summary: Objective and short description of the study's goals, methods and findings. Describe the study in plain English without being critical yet.
  • General assessment: Critical assessment of the study's strengths and weaknesses. Clearly communicate your opinion of the manuscript.
  • Major comments: Detailed description of major weaknesses of the study that affect its validity. Number your comments.
  • Minor comments: Detailed description of minor weaknesses of the study that would improve the paper's quality if they would be fixed. Number your comments.

There are numerous guides in the internet on how to write a good review report and we will also have a peer review coaching during the BREW workshop in May. A good start for you now is this step-by-step guide: Guide

Important note: The point of the BREW workshop and our peer review process is NOT to find the best manuscripts among your submissions. It is rather to practice your skills in paper and review writing and to provide you with valuable feedback. Therefore: Be nice and constructive to each other. Give the review that you would like to receive yourself. Don't restrict yourself to criticism but also mention strengths of the manuscript you evaluate. And remember that our review process is not anonymous but that every author will get to know his/her reviewers at the workshop in May.

Go to Editor View