What is your typical experience with reviewer expertise?

Answer Explanations

• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-287804
  Some reviewers seem very knowledgeable, whereas others seem to miss some points because they do not clearly understand the issue discussed.
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-47498
  Relevant expertise, at a modest or higher level.
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-683654
  It depends on the type of paper.
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-953488
  It really depends on the journal you send the article. I aim for good journals and there the reviewers are very knowledgeable, however, when we send to journals that are not in the top tier, many reviewers have no much idea about the topic.
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-660265
  Not all of my peer reviews were performed by well-qualified scientists. I had one peer review in which the scientist criticized the Western blotting assessment very badly, but the Reviewer was not expertly qualified or experienced in this method.
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-504085
  many appear to lack relevant experience, unfortunately
• Reviewers usually seem highly knowledgeable about my specific research area

  user-717875
  Most jpournals approach a reviewer based on area of expertise
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-259567
  It's tough to get people to review papers and the Senior researchers (many) have commented to myself that they are no longer reviewing papers. So it's just the young assistant professors reviewing papers. Unfortunately.
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-381514
  It is sometimes very difficult to find reviewers with knowledge in specific areas of science. 
• Reviewers often seem to lack relevant expertise

  user-633763
  As mentioned earlier, some reviewers want to increase their participation in peer reviews as an academic activity. In fact, some reviewers accept the editor's invitation even if the subject is outside their area of expertise. Consequently, the authors receive a very superficial report without a thorough evaluation of the manuscript. 
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-252840
  Sometimes we get nice feedback and rarely we get strange unusual feedback with an undisclosed request of citations.
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-868311
  Sometimes they are very deep in the topic and their questions and recommendation are adequate. But in many cases they do not have idea about the topic. 
• Reviewers often seem to lack relevant expertise

  user-68365
  see above 
• Reviewers usually seem highly knowledgeable about my specific research area

  user-763126
  In most cases the Reviewers chosen have met my research expertise.
• Reviewers usually seem highly knowledgeable about my specific research area

  user-429130
   "Sometimes the expertise of reviewers depends on the journal or the specific reviewers selected. In some cases, I get reviewers with excellent subject-specific knowledge, but in others, the feedback seems less informed or less helpful." 
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-863705
  Due to the fact that the editor needs more than 2 reviews and since the (inter/multi/trans)disciplinary of the submitted workis increased in the last years, is difficult to find reviewers with highly knowledge about specific research area. Also, young rersearchers (with lower experience) are involved in the review process more often. 
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-630519
  Peer review is essential for validating scientific research, but it has limitations due to the growing specialization in different fields. Even within the same area of study, subfields can vary greatly, making it difficult for a single reviewer to have deep knowledge of every specific topic. Journal editors try to match reviewers to papers based on their expertise, but they often prioritize availability. To do this, they rely on broad keywords or previous publications, which may not always lead to the best match for specialized or emerging research areas.

  
  Time pressure makes this challenge even worse. The need for fast publication means that journals often choose available reviewers rather than those with the most relevant expertise. As a result, while reviewers usually understand the general subject, they may lack the technical knowledge needed for a detailed and critical evaluation. This issue is especially clear in interdisciplinary research, where studies combine fields like artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, and biomedicine. A reviewer with expertise in one area may struggle to fully assess aspects outside their main field, which could lead to important weaknesses being overlooked.
  
  

  Even with these challenges, peer reviewers play a key role in maintaining scientific quality, especially nowadays. While they may not have deep knowledge of every specialized detail, they are responsible for assessing the research methods, data accuracy, and overall logic of the study. This helps maintain a basic level of quality control. 
  
  

  
  
  
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-753537
  Extremeley variable
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-261073
  This answer is about my areas of expertise that are not on the checklist below. Social epidemiology, health equity, integrative health, SBER (social and behavioral research), protection of human research participants. 
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-234128
  Problems are most common in the general area of data analysis, for which reviewers sometimes recommend methods that are simpler but not as refined or powerful of the ones that are used in the manuscript.  
• Reviewer expertise varies widely

  user-203045
  Now we get a vriable evaluations from minor to rejected when 2 reviewers are involved...
• Reviewers usually have general expertise but may lack specific subject knowledge

  user-596421
  None
• Reviewers usually seem highly knowledgeable about my specific research area

  user-905145
  I am lucky :)
• Other (please explain)

  user-894724
  In today's generation, publishing a good article within a core domain in a peer-reviewed journal is not that easy. So, multidisciplinary works are heavily focused on targeting good journals. The problem with this is that if I work on Microbiology and Biochemistry and use in-silico techniques, the reviewer will be less likely to comment on the in-silico section. This makes a section of the manuscript weak or less-reviewed. So, the choice of reviewer must be versatile to take care of the multiple domains used in a manuscript.