Reviewer Guidelines
Best practices for providing constructive peer review that advances water research quality.
Excellence in Peer Review
Water reviewers ensure scientific validity and help authors improve water research through fair, constructive evaluation and actionable feedback.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts for scientific merit, methodological rigor, and contribution to hydrology knowledge while providing constructive feedback.
Scientific Validity
Assess whether conclusions are supported by data, methods are appropriate, and claims are justified for water research.
Methodological Rigor
Evaluate methodology adequacy, statistical analysis appropriateness, and reproducibility for hydrology studies.
Constructive Feedback
Provide specific, actionable suggestions helping authors improve water manuscripts while maintaining respect.
- Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscript content and author identities for water research
- Decline reviews involving conflicts of interest in water science fields
- Provide objective assessment based on scientific merit, not personal preferences
- Report suspected misconduct or ethical concerns through appropriate channels
Timeline expectations: Complete reviews within 21 days of acceptance. If delays are anticipated, notify the editorial office promptly for water manuscripts.
Effective reviews address major scientific issues, methodological concerns, and presentation clarity. Separate major from minor concerns. Conclude with clear recommendation and justification for water research.
Access Review Resources
Find templates and guidance for preparing quality water research reviews.
View Resources
