Becoming an Excellent Peer Reviewer: A Writer’s Camp Learning Trail
Anjie Raber, PhD, RN, CNE, EBP-CH
Writer’s Camp Senior Counselor
Abstract
Many scholars seek to become peer reviewers but lack guidance. This article outlines how to start, emphasizing the importance of relevant expertise and professional visibility. It advises on qualifications, making direct inquiries to editors, and responding to invitations. Effective communication and self-assessment are key to successful peer reviewing.
For many scholars, the hardest part of peer review is not writing the review—it is figuring out how to begin.
Many scholars want to serve as peer reviewers but aren’t sure how to begin. Others receive invitations but are uncertain when to accept—or how to decline professionally. This Trail Stop focuses on both: how to become a reviewer and how to respond when you are invited.
How Do You Become a Peer Reviewer?
Great news—there’s no single path to becoming a peer reviewer. Some people volunteer, while others are invited after having an article published in a journal. Peer reviewers can also be recommended by colleagues to editors. This means becoming a peer reviewer often comes down to a mix of initiative, expertise, and professional visibility. Things to consider:
- Your clinical specialty
- Research methods expertise
- Theoretical or conceptual knowledge
- Professional roles (educator, administrator, clinician)
- Emerging areas of interest
- Alignment with the purpose or focus of the journal
Matching your expertise to reviewer needs can help you identify opportunities to contribute.
Other tips to becoming a peer reviewer include joining a research network or proactively connecting with other published researchers.1 These opportunities can help you develop relationships and build skills, gain expertise, and obtain professional visibility to support you in becoming a peer reviewer.
Qualifications: Educational and Experiential
Some journals list formal qualifications for reviewers—such as doctoral degrees, research experience, or publication history. These qualifications are often aspirational rather than mandatory so if you would like to be a reviewer for a particular journal, especially one you read regularly, don’t be shy about reaching out, even if you don’t tick all the boxes for suggested requirements.
Editors ultimately value reviewers who:
- Provide thoughtful feedback;
- Meet deadlines;
- Communicate professionally; and
- Understand the journal’s audience.
In many cases, doing a good job matters more than the letters after your name.
Experience also counts. Clinical expertise, teaching experience, policy work, or professional leadership can all contribute to strong peer reviews—particularly for practice-oriented journals.
If you chat with any editor, they will likely tell you that submissions are increasing for their journal and finding qualified reviewers is a challenge. Even if the editor has a long list of names, a mounting frustration is that potential reviewers decline invitations—it is not uncommon for an editor to invite seven, eight, or nine or more people to get one who agrees to do a review. Therefore, if you are interested in being a peer reviewer and have the requisite skills and knowledge, an editor will most likely be happy to give you a try. They will evaluate you on the job you do with an actual manuscript, more than educational and experiential qualifications.
Although it is not a qualification per se, you should have an ORCiD ID when you apply to be a reviewer.2 Editors are confronting issues related to artificial intelligence (AI) such as hallucinated references and AI authored manuscripts.3 They are also dealing with AI reviewers writing fake reviews. To mitigate this problem, it is becoming common for editors to require that their peer reviewers have an ORCiD ID, just like authors. Obtaining an ORCiD ID is free and easy, so if you don’t have one, you should get one, as soon as you finish reading this article!
Peer Reviewer Needs: A Resource Here at Writer’s Camp
Journal websites may not be clear on what they want for peer reviewer expertise, but don’t let that deter you. We have a resource here at Writer’s Camp, the Peer Reviewer Needs Table, which shows reviewer needs by journal. The table was created from a survey of nursing journal editors (75 at the time of this writing) and collected information on: 1) their need for peer reviewers, 2) educational and experiential qualifications, 3) additional credentials they might require, and 4) how to become a reviewer for the journal.4
A quick glance shows that reviewers are often needed in specific areas: methods, clinical specialties, theoretical perspectives, or professional roles. Most editors are happy to receive a direct inquiry expressing interest in being a reviewer. Once they know about you, they will follow up with a request for any further information needed to add you to their roster.
Contacting an Editor
So—you’ve looked at the table and are ready to reach out to an editor. That’s great. But it is important to put your best foot forward, especially if you don’t know the editor personally. A brief, professional message is often sufficient. Helpful elements include:
- A short introduction;
- Your areas of expertise;
- Your experience (clinical, research, educational); and
- A brief statement of interest.
Do:
- Keep the message brief;
- Be specific about your expertise;
- Be professional and courteous; and
- Include a CV if appropriate or if requested.
Don’t:
- Address the editor incorrectly—make sure you know their name and honorific (ie, Dr. Jones instead of Dear Editor);
- Send long autobiographical messages;
- Overstate expertise;
- Request only certain types of manuscripts; or
- Follow up repeatedly. If you don’t receive a reply in a couple of weeks, one polite note is fine, but don’t be a pest.
Editors appreciate reviewers who are professional, thoughtful, and realistic about their expertise.
Confronting Imposter Syndrome
As you reach out to an editor, you may feel a little intimidated and hesitant to describe your expertise. One great way to overcome this challenge is to objectively summarize your achievements, as outlined in your CV, and then send it to a colleague for a polish and to give an outsider’s view of what your expertise will add to their journal. This will help you get outside of yourself and think more about this opportunity as a the professional responsibility that it is.5
Identifying Your Classifications
Once you have an invitation to be a reviewer, your next step is to be registered so that can receive manuscripts for review. Journals maintain their reviewer database through their manuscript submission system. These systems use classifications, that is, keywords, that help editors match manuscripts with appropriate reviewers.6,7
Common classification categories include:
- Clinical specialty
- Research methods
- Professional role
- Topic expertise
Taking time to complete your classifications thoughtfully can increase the likelihood of receiving appropriate manuscript invitations.8 This step is often overlooked or done quickly, but it can make a significant difference in your reviewer experience. If you can do it through the system, you should occasionally review your classifications (and your contact information) and update as necessary.
Accepting (or Declining) the Invitation
When you are in system as a reviewer, the editor will select you for a manuscript and this, in turn, generates an invitation to review. The invitation usually includes the manuscript title and abstract so you can decide if it is appropriate for your expertise. You can accept or decline the request. Although some say you should always accept an invitation,9 I think there are some critical aspects you should consider before making your decision.
Consider accepting when:
- The topic fits your expertise;
- You have time to complete the review;
- You can meet the deadline; and
- You have no conflicts of interest.
It is appropriate to decline when an invitation is an issue. For example, if you are about to head off on a month-long vacation, then certainly you should politely refuse. Or, if the abstract is completely unclear to you, it is unlikely that the full article will be any different. Declining thoughtfully helps editors identify appropriate reviewers and keeps the process moving. That said, try to accept more invitations than you decline. If you are finding that abstracts are not a good fit, consider refining your classifications within the system to improve matching of your expertise with manuscript topics.
Professional Communication
Whether accepting or declining, communication matters. It is important to respond promptly and remain professional and courteous. If declining, suggest other reviewers, if possible. Editors remember reviewers who communicate clearly and reliably. The editing community is small, which means developing a positive reputation with an editor will likely lead to future invitations.
It is also appropriate to reach out and let the editor know of any major changes in your life or schedule that would impact your availability. Heading out of the country for a 6-month sabbatical certainly is worth mentioning, as is a 3-month parental leave. Editors appreciate reviewers who stay in touch.
Conclusion
Reviewing your skills, expertise, availability, and alignment with the journal’s purpose are critical first steps in becoming a peer reviewer. Although imposter syndrome can present a challenge for many individuals, reframing it as a professional responsibility may help overcome this pattern of thinking. Deciding whether to accept or decline an invitation to serve as a peer reviewer can be difficult. However, ensuring you have the appropriate expertise and sufficient time are essential factors to consider when evaluating this opportunity. Finally, maintaining clear and professional communication is a key component of the peer review process.
References
- Enago Academy. Peer reviewers: get noticed by editors. Enago Academy. Accessed May 3, 2026. https://www.enago.com/academy/peer-reviewers-get-noticed-by-editors/
- Pickler RH. Why you, and they, need an ORCiD. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2025; 1(2):3. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15836207
- Nicoll LH. Reference managers, artificial intelligence, and the integrity of scholarly writing. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2):8. doi:10.5281/zenodo.20101699
- Nicoll LH. Peer reviewer needs. Writer’s Camp. Published April 11, 2026. Accessed May 3, 2026. https://writers-camp.org/peer-reviewer-need/
- Pate K. Imposter syndrome in nursing: a barrier to personal growth. American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN). Published July 10, 2023. Accessed May 3, 2026. https://www.aacn.org/blog/imposter-syndrome-in-nursing-a-barrier-to-personal-growth
- Sedaghat AR, Bernal-Sprekelsen M, Fokkens WJ, Smith TL, Stewart MG, Johnson RF. How to be a good reviewer: a step-by-step guide for approaching peer review of a scientific manuscript. Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology. 2024;9(3):e1266. doi:10.1002/lio2.1266
- NANDA International, Inc. Why serving as a peer reviewer matters for nursing knowledge. NANDA International, Inc. Published November 18, 2025. Accessed May 3, 2026. https://nanda.org/2025/11/why-serving-as-a-peer-reviewer-matters-for-nursing-knowledge/
- PLOS. You’ve been invited to review. Now what? PLOS. Accessed May 3, 2026. https://plos.org/resource/youve-been-invited-to-review-now-what/
- Stam H, Borg K, Granlund T. Why you should always accept an invitation to review a scientific article. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2022;54:jrm00252. doi:10.2340/jrm.v54.1979.
Author: Anjie Raber
Reviewed and Edited by: Leslie H. Nicoll
Copyright © 2026 Writer’s Camp and Anjie Raber. CC-BY-ND 4.0
Citation: Raber A. Becoming a peer reviewer and accepting (or declining) the invitation. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2): doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20137489