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

Reviewer role typology

A controlled vocabulary for distinguishing types of peer-review activity — e.g., manuscript peer reviewer, grant reviewer, conference programme committee member, data peer reviewer, software peer reviewer, reproducibility reviewer — used to give differentiated credit for review work.

ByCASRAI Editorial Board
· Last updated 22 Aug 2026
Share this

Ask CASRAI · included with Regulatory Radar

Ask about Reviewer role typology

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 researcher's ORCID record showing reviews disaggregated by type: 20 manuscript reviews, 5 grant reviews, 2 reproducibility reviews

Counter-examples

Looks similar, but isn't

  • Not an instance

    A single 'reviews' count with no type information loses the typology's distinctions

Editorial commentary

Reviewer role typology is a controlled vocabulary that distinguishes different kinds of peer-review activity — manuscript reviewer, grant reviewer, conference programme-committee member, data peer reviewer, software peer reviewer, and reproducibility reviewer among them — so that review work can be credited with the same granularity CRediT brings to authorship. Codified in the NISO Peer Review Terminology Recommended Practice (NISO RP-29-2024), the typology underpins how platforms like ORCID structure a researcher’s review record.

How it differs from related terms: Peer reviewer contribution is the underlying activity being classified; the typology is the classification scheme itself. A reproducibility reviewer — who checks that a paper’s code and data actually reproduce its reported results — is one specific type this vocabulary distinguishes from a standard manuscript reviewer assessing the argument and evidence.

Without a typology, a researcher’s review record collapses into one undifferentiated count; with it, a CV or ORCID record can show, for example, twenty manuscript reviews alongside five grant reviews and two reproducibility checks, each a distinct and separately creditable form of labour.

References

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

Also known as

Peer review activity types · Reviewer type vocabulary

Machine-readable encodings

Use in your systems

JATS XML <role> element
xml
<role vocab="credit"
      vocab-identifier="https://casrai.org/dictionary/"
      vocab-term="Reviewer role typology"
      vocab-term-identifier="https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/reviewer-role-typology" />
Schema.org DefinedTerm (JSON-LD)
json
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "DefinedTerm",
  "@id": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/reviewer-role-typology",
  "name": "Reviewer role typology",
  "identifier": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/reviewer-role-typology",
  "description": "A controlled vocabulary for distinguishing types of peer-review activity — e.g., manuscript peer reviewer, grant reviewer, conference programme committee member, data peer reviewer, software peer reviewer, reproducibility reviewer — used to give differentiated credit for review work.",
  "inDefinedTermSet": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/domain/credit-extensions#set",
  "url": "https://casrai.org/dictionary/term/reviewer-role-typology",
  "sameAs": [
    "Peer review activity types",
    "Reviewer type vocabulary"
  ],
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "publisher": {
    "@id": "https://casrai.org/#organization"
  },
  "author": {
    "@id": "https://casrai.org/#editorial-team"
  },
  "datePublished": "2026-05-21T02:00:33",
  "dateModified": "2026-08-22T15:04:48",
  "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.