Peer reviewers may be suggested by:
- the Editor handling the manuscript;
- authors on submission of their manuscript to a journal;
- another reviewer who is unable to peer review the manuscript.
While there is an expectation that everyone involved in the process acts with integrity, the peer review process can be susceptible to manipulation as discussed at COPE’s 2016 North American Seminar. The features or patterns of activity shown opposite are suggested to help Editors recognise potential signs of peer review manipulation. Often it is the occurrence of these features in combination that may indicate a potential issue, and they may only become apparent at later stages in the peer review or publishing process.
About this resource
Author Developed by COPE Council
Version 1 September 2017
How to cite this
COPE Council. How to spot potential manipulation of the peer review process. Version 1. 2017
Our COPE materials are available to use under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license
Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
Non-commercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works —
You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. We ask that you give full accreditation to COPE with a link to our website: publicationethics.org