kth.sePublications KTH
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Feedback practices in journal peer-review: a systematic literature review
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4519-0544
KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Learning, Learning in Stem.ORCID iD: 0009-0001-1526-3968
2024 (English)In: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, ISSN 0260-2938, E-ISSN 1469-297X, Vol. 49, no 1, p. 1-12Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Feedback provided by peer reviewers plays a pivotal role in any journal peer-review model. Peer-review feedback helps authors reconsider their manuscripts in a new light and improve their work before it is published. While there is a wealth of knowledge and empirical evidence focusing on effective feedback practices in educational settings, there is a dearth of research on journal peer-review feedback, especially in some academic disciplines including the social sciences and education. To better understand ‘good’ and ‘bad’ peer-review feedback practices across academic disciplines, we conducted a systematic literature review, informed by grounded theory, that aimed to identify the feedback features and factors that exert an impact on quality of peer-review feedback. Findings from 20 publications indicate a list of good and bad features of peer-review feedback pertaining to content, language, tone, structure and timeliness. We also identified a number of internal and external factors that influence how peer reviewers provide feedback such as academics’ expertise, language skills, motivation and seniority, as well as external influences such as anonymity in peer-review, and interactions between editors and peer reviewers. Implications for researching and practising peer-review are discussed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Informa UK Limited , 2024. Vol. 49, no 1, p. 1-12
Keywords [en]
feedback, journals, Peer-review, research evaluation, reviewers, systematic literature review
National Category
Specific Languages
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-335754DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2022.2164757ISI: 000913791500001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85146261842OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-335754DiVA, id: diva2:1795817
Note

QC 20251222

Available from: 2023-09-11 Created: 2023-09-11 Last updated: 2025-12-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Lin, Tingjun

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Chong, Sin WangLin, Tingjun
By organisation
Learning in Stem
In the same journal
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Specific Languages

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 165 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf