4
What are the reasons you decline a peer review invitation?
Results
| Never | Rarely | Sometimes | Frequently | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time constraints | 8.42% 32 | 15.00% 57 | 36.32% 138 | 40.26% 153 | 380 |
| Topic outside expertise | 3.94% 15 | 15.22% 58 | 38.32% 146 | 42.52% 162 | 381 |
| Too many other review commitments | 14.36% 52 | 24.86% 90 | 43.37% 157 | 17.40% 63 | 362 |
| Conflicts of interest | 44.29% 159 | 38.16% 137 | 8.91% 32 | 8.64% 31 | 359 |
| Paper quality concerns | 24.39% 90 | 27.37% 101 | 35.23% 130 | 13.01% 48 | 369 |
| Journal quality concerns | 16.98% 63 | 22.64% 84 | 35.85% 133 | 24.53% 91 | 371 |
| Other [please specify] | 64.66% 86 | 15.79% 21 | 13.53% 18 | 6.02% 8 | 133 |
Experts most frequently decline peer review invitations when the topic falls outside their expertise, with over half indicating they do this "Frequently" or "Sometimes." Time constraints represent the second most common reason, with many experts citing this as a "Frequently" occurring issue.
Journal quality concerns show significant division among respondents - many experts "Frequently" decline reviews for lower quality journals, while others rarely consider this factor. Similarly, having too many existing review commitments is a common but not universal concern.
Conflicts of interest and paper quality concerns are less frequently cited as reasons for declining reviews. Most experts report these issues arise only "Rarely" or "Sometimes," with many indicating they "Never" decline for these reasons.
Several experts mentioned additional reasons in their comments, including poor English in manuscripts, preference for reviewing only in specific journals where they publish, and concerns about reviewing without compensation for commercial publishers.
Summary Generated by AI
Answer Explanations
- user-905834
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 1 0 0 0 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 Mostly, I will manage and complete my schedule; I am more concerned about the quality of publications. - user-673903
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 1 0 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] 0 0 1 0 When it appears the authors haven't even tried to write in coherent English. - user-287804
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 1 0 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] 0 0 1 0 For other: Contents is not of interest - user-882784
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 1 0 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 Reviewers may decline invitations for several reasons, such as lack of time, conflicts of interest, or insufficient expertise on the subject matter. For example, a reviewer might not have enough time to thoroughly assess a manuscript due to personal or professional commitments. They might also decline if they have a conflict of interest, such as a personal relationship with the authors or financial ties to a competing organization. In some cases, a reviewer might feel that the manuscript is outside their area of expertise, and they may not feel qualified to provide a meaningful evaluation. - user-439026
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 0 1 0 0 My preference in accepting of peer review is my fine specialty, parasitology - user-740731
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 0 0 0 1 Paper quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 0 1 Not in the exact field of expertise - user-832173
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 1 0 0 I don't like peer review out of the field of my expertise. - user-986977
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 0 0 1 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 0 0 1 0 Renumeration - user-135565
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 0 0 1 0 If the journal is unknown. - user-295767
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] I try not to refuse unless outside my area. - user-640046
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 0 1 Other: whether it is a journal in which I publish, or other particular journals that always desk-reject submissions - user-861466
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 1 0 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] Mainly time constraints. - user-676638
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 0 1 Unless and until some manuscript is scientifically too interesting for me, I usually decline review requests coming from commercial publishers, if they are not offering any honorarium. However I am still doing it for free, when the review requests come from journals published by some scientific society. - user-105846
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 1 0 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 In general, I accept the invitations of the papers concerned. - user-548125
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Other [please specify] first of all, I have too many of them, the issues often discussed are not familiar to me enough to be able to honestly review the work - user-84898
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 0 1 Scientists are generally quite overloaded with work and tasks, and finding time and energy to provide high-standard review of manuscripts is difficult and not easily prioritized, especially when there is usually no compensation at all. - user-962329
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 1 0 0 0 Topic outside expertise 1 0 0 0 Too many other review commitments 1 0 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 Never turn paper down. - user-961571
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 1 0 Clarity of title and abstract sometimes make me feel not interested in reviewing a paper. - user-103012
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 1 0 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Other [please specify] I rarely decline but does so only when there are too many other commitments - user-980558
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 1 0 0 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Other [please specify] I completed my last peer review within the past week and maintain an active review volume of more than 20 per year. I carefully select invitations that align with my expertise, and while I receive many requests annually, I accept those where I can offer meaningful, well-considered feedback—usually dedicating 4–8 hours to each review. I only occasionally decline invitations, primarily due to time constraints or if the topic falls outside my core areas of expertise, ensuring that every review I undertake is both thorough and valuable. - user-314109
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 . - user-592268
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 1 0 0 when the article is out of my expertise - user-797353
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 0 0 0 1 I usually do reviews for journals where I am in their editorial board members. - user-226593
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] I declined 1 request due to the significant difference in field of expertise - user-123942
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 Quality of manuscripts are most important. - user-382369
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] 0 0 0 1 I do not want to continúe working free for editorials that mate me pay when I submit a paper. I consider it is not fair. - user-863596
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 1 0 0 Nothing more - user-577239
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 0 0 1 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 0 1 Sometimes I'm asked to review a paper published on a paper I never heard of and I fear it is not really a paper but just a waste of time - user-846904
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 0 0 0 1 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 I think that, regardless of the publisher or the manuscript, every researcher should have the opportunity to publish an article and, therefore, receive a qualitative review before acceptance. - user-920339
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 1 0 I refuse to do reviews for journals who have as a deadline "within 10 days" or less. This includes top journals. - user-683654
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 1 0 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 1 0 0 I review those I consider come from very strong journals. Many journals are just out to make money. - user-485021
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 1 0 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest Paper quality concerns 0 1 0 0 Journal quality concerns Other [please specify] Sometimes I have multiple requests to review during the same period of time. Occasionally I receive the requests to review manuscripts which are not in my area of expertise. - user-558408
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 1 0 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 0 0 0 1 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 I only decline when there are conflicts and when I have time constraints. - user-427123
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 1 0 Conflicts of interest 0 0 0 1 Paper quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 0 0 1 0 I usually declined peer-review invitation due to irrelevant issues . - user-587566
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 0 1 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 0 0 0 1 Paper quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Journal quality concerns 0 0 0 1 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 Lack of Access to Essential Resources - user-71516
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 0 1 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 0 0 1 Conflicts of interest 0 1 0 0 Paper quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] NA - user-333723
Never Rarely Sometimes Frequently Time constraints 0 0 1 0 Topic outside expertise 0 0 1 0 Too many other review commitments 0 1 0 0 Conflicts of interest 1 0 0 0 Paper quality concerns 1 0 0 0 Journal quality concerns 0 0 1 0 Other [please specify] 1 0 0 0 I decline a peer review invitation when I have too many other review commitments, time constraints due to personal or professional obligations, or if the manuscript falls outside my area of expertise. Additionally, I may decline if I identify a conflict of interest that could compromise the integrity of the review process or if the manuscript lacks fundamental scientific rigor and requires extensive revisions before a fair evaluation can be conducted.
user-272415
02/13/2025 06:26user-496176
02/26/2025 06:54user-763126
02/27/2025 05:49