Equitable Peer Review

Journal editors should develop written guidelines specifying policies for equitable peer view for both reviewers and for journal staff.

At a minimum, journals should provide clear rubrics or instructions for reviewers that specify “what is acceptable and unacceptable in a reviewer report regarding tone, language, and content” (COPE: Guidance on Editing Peer Reviews). The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), for example, explains reviewer instructions “should clarify relevant journal policies (with links to those policies) regarding the tone, language quality, and content of reviews, specifying that comments should be constructive, courteous, and clear” (COPE: Guidance on Editing Peer Reviews).

APA Publishing further suggests that journal editors “communicate clear policies and procedures for addressing bias and discrimination in reviews”. They can also “develop codes of conduct for their editorial boards, outlining expectations for how reviewers should conduct themselves in a review and offering clear guidelines for addressing racism in the peer review process” (APA Publishing's Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Toolkit for Journal Editors).

Additional guidelines for reviewers could also direct reviewers to:

• Ask themselves whether a submission (1) has the potential to be misused to cause harm (2) reinforces racial or ethnic myths of superiority/inferiority or (3) promotes knowledge that contributes to the wellbeing of all communities (Anti-Racist Scholarly Reviewing Practices).
• Be particularly attentive and sensitive when reviewing submissions with “language issues that are due to the authors writing in a language that is not their first or most proficient language, and phrase the feedback appropriately and with due respect”(COPE: Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers). As always, reviewers should focus on the merit, meaning, and impact of a submission, not on any minor language issues.

Guidelines for editors could direct them to:

• Be flexible, proactive, and understanding with reviewers regarding review due dates, deadlines, and extensions (Anti-Racist Scholarly Reviewing Practices).
• Keep track of the “number of reviews each person has conducted to avoid overburdening specific scholars” (Anti-Racist Scholarly Reviewing Practices).