Peer review is a fundamental pillar of science, which means it’s a part of every scientist’s job. But, we’re all short on time and attention. Thus, where you choose to devote your peer-review service matters, and one fellow entomologist urges you to prioritize reviewing for journals at the Entomological Society of America and other scientific societies.

By Rob Morrison, Ph.D.

Rob Morrison, Ph.D.

As scientists, many of us are extremely time-limited in our daily activities. That is, we have finite bandwidth, and we have only so much extra time to devote to additional tasks such as reviewing manuscripts for scholarly journals. However, no one can publish without having their work peer reviewed, so reviewing serves the collective good. In addition, for the reviewer, it is an excellent way to stay abreast of the latest research.

Typically, peer review involves (at least) two anonymous reviewers and also includes review by a subject or handling editor. Thus, if you have published 20 manuscripts, a conservative calculation would indicate you owe your peers at least 40 reviews of other’s work. This quickly becomes daunting. Honestly, if you publish with high frequency, you may never be able to claw your way out of the peer-review deficit, but importantly you should never forget that you are in debt to others who have reviewed your work in the past and should be contributing in some manner to this important service.

Your Peer-Review Priorities Matter

More importantly, it absolutely matters when and how you repay your peer-review deficit. The truth is that all of us start to become bombarded by an insurmountable number of review requests, and with that comes choices about what to review, and to whom you offer your peer review services. Instead of just reviewing for the people who ask you first, it may make sense to use reviewing as an opportunity for prioritizing serving your profession, namely entomology.

What does this mean? Well, many journals, like the Entomological Society of America’s family of journals (and there are others too), are society-run journals. This means that they are run by nonprofits, and, in the case of ESA journals, publishing in these journals helps fund everything else the organization does, including subsidizing the Annual Meetings, Awards & Honors for students and early career researchers, and a whole slew of other activities that yield benefits to entomology as a whole. Compare this to reviewing articles for say Elsevier, Wiley, MDPI, or other for-profit publishers, whose journals only help their shareholders’ bottom line, and it becomes very clear why not all reviews have the same “moral worth” or benefit to your discipline.

For me personally, here is how I prioritize my editorial work:

1. My first priority is to fulfill my duty in my official editorial roles, such as subject editor for Environmental Entomology.
2. For my remaining time, I prioritize review requests from ESA and other society-run journals that I am a member of and whose topic falls in my realm of expertise.
3. I might consider performing a review for a for-profit journal if my time allows, and it is something of immediate research interest, but I usually decline most of these.

It is no secret that reviewers are getting harder to find. On a typical manuscript I handle at Environmental Entomology, I usually need to request seven to 11 people to review before getting two to agree. This is after specifically making sure I am inviting people who are actively working in that or a related area.

How to Get Started Reviewing

For those earlier in their career, a common question is how to contribute to peer review and get started. I would encourage you to reach out to your advisor or principal investigator (PI) and ask to be involved in their next review invitation from an ESA journal. There is a specific form field to give early career folks credit for helping with reviews when the review is submitted back to ESA by the PI.

For PIs whose students express interest, it is possible you already know a subject editor at one or more of ESA journals, so you could check the subject editor list from the editorial board page, reach out to one of the editors, and let them know you are looking for an opportunity for your student to review in subject areas most applicable to your laboratory.

If it is your first review, you may want to check out the Morrison Lab peer review handout to see where to get started, and what questions you should be asking when doing a peer review. This is an opportunity for PIs to mentor early career researchers on how to professionally conduct a peer review. Thus, peer reviews can become a teaching moment.

Finally, ESA also has a peer-reviewer sign-up form for people to express that interest and be added to the reviewer database. On that form, you can give your contact information, express for which journals you would be interested in reviewing manuscripts, and indicate your expertise, educational level, and so on.

Peer Review With Purpose

Full disclosure, I am currently a member of the ESA Publications Council, but I have been troubled by most of the discussions I have had with peers about peer review, as it seems to miss the point that not all reviews are equally onerous or without benefit. Your service in reviewing articles for ESA journals does not go unnoticed, and it is valued by your peers and the profession.

I hope you will give thought to how and for whom you review articles to serve the greater purpose of entomology and all of its related disciplines. Doing so may have multiplicative benefits beyond simply “using” your time for the review you have committed to. Done thoughtfully, peer review can also support students, early career researchers, and our science as a whole.

Rob Morrison, Ph.D., is a Research Entomologist at the USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Center for Grain and Animal Health Research, in the Stored Product Insects and Engineering Research Unit, in Manhattan, Kansas. Web: www.ars.usda.gov/pa/cgahr/spieru/morrison. Bluesky: @morrisonlabUSDA.bsky.social. Email: [email protected].