A step-by-step guide to navigating peer review requests with clarity, care, and informed choice

Every week, across disciplines, thousands of researchers are invited to review for academic journals, often unpaid, usually under time pressure, and sometimes with little information about the journal’s values. If you’ve ever paused to ask Where does the money go? or Why am I being asked to work for free?, you’re not alone.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: much of academic publishing depends on the unpaid labour of reviewers and editors, while generating substantial profits through article processing charges (APCs), institutional subscriptions, or hybrid paywalls. Universities pay to submit work, pay to access it, and pay researchers to write and review, yet the profits often go to large publishing houses rather than back into scholarship or community infrastructure.

So when you’re asked to review, the question isn’t only “Do I have time?” It’s also:

• Do I share this journal’s values and publishing model?
• Is this a meaningful use of my time, energy, and insight?
• Am I contributing to a healthier publishing ecosystem—or reinforcing an extractive one?

This guide won’t offer a simple “yes” or “no”—but it will help you think through your decision with integrity and care.

Clarify Your Motivation

Why are you considering reviewing in the first place?

☑ Reflect on:

• Do you want to contribute to your field’s scholarly ecosystem?
• Are you hoping to gain insight into peer review?
• Is this journal aligned with your interests and community?

✍ I’m considering reviewing because ____________________________
and I hope it will help me ____________________________.

Assess the Journal’s Practices

Not all journals operate with the same values or transparency.

☑ Ask:

• Is this journal non-profit, university-based, society-run, or corporate?
• Are authors and reviewers treated with respect and clarity?
• Does it support open access, fair labor, or research equity?

✍ One thing I appreciate (or question) about this journal is ____________________________.

Consider Your Capacity and Expertise

Time and energy are finite. It’s okay to decline, or to set boundaries.

☑ Check:

• Do I have the time to review well, without rushing?
• Does the manuscript match my area of expertise?
• Can I meet the timeline without compromising care?

✍ I feel confident reviewing this paper because ____________________________
but I’ll need to be mindful of ____________________________.

Think About Reciprocity and Ecosystem Health

Academic peer review relies on mutual care, but the system is out of balance.

☑ Reflect on:

• Have I published without reviewing lately?
• Could my feedback uplift early-career, interdisciplinary, or underrepresented authors?
• Does this review request align with a publishing ecosystem I want to support?

✍ One way I’ve benefited from peer review is ____________________________
and I’d like to give back by ____________________________.

Decide with Integrity

There’s no perfect answer, only one that aligns with your values, limits, and intentions.

☑ Ask yourself:

• Will this review feel purposeful—or extractive?
• Will I offer something generative and respectful?
• Will I feel okay saying yes—or relieved saying no?

✍ My decision is to ____________________________
because it reflects ____________________________.

Final Reflection: What Kind of Reviewer Do You Want to Be?

Whether you accept or decline, you’re shaping the culture of peer review. What kind of reviewer would you want to receive feedback from?

✍ If I do review, I want to be the kind of reviewer who ____________________________.

Pop over to Gwenin for a selection of frameworks, or pop over to Spiralmore’s collections. You’re also welcome to explore our more relaxed corner: the informal blog.