Skip to main content
v2026.11,772 entries · CC-BY 4.0
Dictionary termTrack AStablev2026.2

Peer reviewer contribution

The intellectual labour of evaluating a scholarly submission's validity, originality, significance, and clarity for a journal, funder, or conference, distinct from authorship and from editorial decision-making.

ByCASRAI Editorial Board
· Last updated 22 Aug 2026
Share this

Ask CASRAI · included with Regulatory Radar

Ask about Peer reviewer contribution

Ask CASRAI answers research-administration questions and cites the passages behind every claim — and says so when the corpus does not cover something, instead of guessing. It comes with a Regulatory Radar subscription at $29 a month, alongside the daily digest of regulatory changes and the dashboard of what changed.

150 questions a day, on this site, over the API, or inside your own tools through the CASRAI MCP server.

Everything CASRAI publishes — this page, the dictionary, the guides and the news — stays free to read, with no account and no card.

Examples

Worked examples

  • Is an instance

    A reviewer's ORCID record showing 30 reviews for a named journal over five years

Counter-examples

Looks similar, but isn't

  • Not an instance

    Informally reading a colleague's draft over lunch is feedback, not formal peer review in the creditable sense

Editorial commentary

Peer reviewer contribution is the intellectual labour of evaluating a scholarly submission’s validity, originality, significance, and clarity on behalf of a journal, funder, or conference — work that is distinct from authorship and from the editor’s own decision-making, even though the two are closely linked. It is increasingly recognised as creditable in its own right through ORCID review records, publisher-issued reviewer statements, and open peer review, rather than being invisible, unpaid labour with no public trace.

How it differs from related terms: Reviewer role typology is the controlled vocabulary used to distinguish types of review activity (manuscript, grant, conference, data, reproducibility) so that credit can be disaggregated rather than lumped into one undifferentiated “reviewed X papers” count; editorial contribution is a separate, higher-authority role that synthesises reviewer feedback into an actual accept/reject decision.

Disclosure conventions for peer review range from fully anonymous, where neither party is named, through single- and double-anonymous, to fully open review where the reviewer’s identity and report are published alongside the paper — the credit mechanism differs accordingly.

References

  • NISO Peer Review Terminology Recommended Practice, NISO RP-29-2024
  • ORCID Peer Review Records documentation

Also known as

Reviewer credit · Refereeing

Machine-readable encodings

Use in your systems

JATS XML <role> element
xml
<role vocab="credit"
      vocab-identifier="https://casrai.org/dictionary/"
      vocab-term="Peer reviewer contribution"
      vocab-term-identifier="https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/peer-reviewer-contribution" />
Schema.org DefinedTerm (JSON-LD)
json
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "DefinedTerm",
  "@id": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/peer-reviewer-contribution",
  "name": "Peer reviewer contribution",
  "identifier": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/peer-reviewer-contribution",
  "description": "The intellectual labour of evaluating a scholarly submission's validity, originality, significance, and clarity for a journal, funder, or conference, distinct from authorship and from editorial decision-making.",
  "inDefinedTermSet": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/domain/credit-extensions#set",
  "url": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/peer-reviewer-contribution",
  "sameAs": [
    "Reviewer credit",
    "Refereeing"
  ],
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "publisher": {
    "@id": "https://casrai.org/#organization"
  },
  "author": {
    "@id": "https://casrai.org/#editorial-team"
  },
  "datePublished": "2026-05-21T01:58:09",
  "dateModified": "2026-08-22T15:04:44",
  "inLanguage": "en-GB",
  "isAccessibleForFree": true
}

Referenced across the research world

University of Cambridge logoColumbia University logoCrossref logoUniversity of Edinburgh logoHarvard University logoUniversity of Oxford logoPrinceton University logoStanford School of Medicine logoUniversity College London logoORCID logoUniversity of Cambridge logoColumbia University logoCrossref logoUniversity of Edinburgh logoHarvard University logoUniversity of Oxford logoPrinceton University logoStanford School of Medicine logoUniversity College London logoORCID logo
  • University of Cambridge logo
  • Columbia University logo
  • Crossref logo
  • University of Edinburgh logo
  • Harvard University logo
  • University of Oxford logo
  • Princeton University logo
  • Stanford School of Medicine logo
  • University College London logo
  • ORCID logo

View CASRAI adoption →

Regulatory Radar

Stop finding out after the fact

$29/month, cancel anytime. Daily digest updates from our analysis, a dashboard holding the same items, and a cited assistant for everything they raise.

  • Federal Register, Federal Register+, Grants.gov, Regulations.gov, NSF News, UKRI, plus CASRAI’s own published content.
  • 72,264 indexed passages, and every answer cites the ones it drew on.