Have You Thanked A Reviewer Today?

Abstract

One of the most gratifying aspects of journal editing is the feedback we get from authors who recognize and appreciate the guidance they receive from reviewers to strengthen their papers. I have received dozens of comments like these: “I am impressed by the high-quality reviewing process”; “This was my first time submitting a manuscript to the journal and I can only say good things about the review process”; “we really appreciate the comments from reviewers and editors that help to improve this paper!”. Critical and constructive manuscript reviews take time that is donated by members of the scientific community to peers. Peer review is essential for validating scientific research and giving readers confidence that they can trust the authors’ methods, analyses, and conclusions. I value the time given by every reviewer for Limnology and Oceanography Letters, but here want to acknowledge and thank ten who have contributed the most as reviewers since the journal’s inception in 2016 (Fig. 1). Each is a highly accomplished research scientist who graciously gives more than their share to the peer review process. I asked them why they do this, and their responses had common themes of peer review as a responsibility, learning opportunity, and community service: “I think we have an ethical responsibility to put in what we take out of the system.” “I learn so much when I review manuscripts. Reviewing also challenges me to be a better scientist.” “The scientific process is a team sport. If I want to rely on other scientists to give me constructive criticism and fair feedback, it’s my responsibility to do the same for others.” “Although I am supporting a journal while performing a review, much of the benefit goes to the author whose work I am reviewing.” These responses illustrate why the scientific peer-review system has been described as “an amazing cooperative network” (McPeek et al. 2009). The contemporary system of scientific publishing is utterly dependent upon this cooperative network built from a community sense of responsibility to give the time we have received from peers to review for others. I hope the words from these exemplary members of our community inspire you to say yes when you can provide timely, fair, and constructive manuscript reviews for your peers. Early Career Researchers are eager to contribute as reviewers, and ASLO’s Raelyn Cole Editorial Fellows have published valuable resources for learning about the peer-review process and joining the reviewer community: https://www. aslo.org/rcef-virtual-issue-2022/.