• Copyright: peerreviewweek.wordpress.com

    © peerreviewweek.wordpress.com


We are excited to celebrate Peer Review Week 2022

This year’s theme is Research Integrity: Creating and supporting trust in research. Integrity is the bedrock in all research and a fundamental basis for communicating research results.

Both our double blinded peer review processes as well as the tremendous work of our reviewers enable us to publish research at the highest quality. We would like to take this opportunity to express our deepest gratitude to our reviewers whose contributions ensure the publication of trusted journals.

It is our pleasure to introduce you to two of our most diligent reviewers. We asked them to share some of their review experience with us. Please find their answers below.

Rebecca Grange

Rebecca Grange Reviewer of Synthesis Chemistry

3 questions to Rebecca Grange

1.) What are your first steps in reviewing a new manuscript?

First off I like to read through the entire manuscript really slowly. During my first read of the introductory paragraphs I aim to ascertain what the authors see as gaps in existing knowledge and how their manuscript will rectify this. In the results section I try to understand the chemistry that is being described and determine whether the data supports the claims.

2.) What motivates you to be a peer reviewer?

The challenge of having to quickly become familiar with out of field chemistry so that I can make an informed judgement on the manuscript.  I also appreciate the opportunity to contribute in a very small way to improving the quality of a manuscript.  

3.) Why is reviewing fun? Is it fun at all?

I enjoy learning some new chemistry that is far removed from my day to day focus at work.  After submitting my review I also look forward to reading the other reviews of the paper.  It’s fun to see if my fellow reviewers picked up anything that I missed.

Sumrit Wacharasindhu

Sumrit Wacharasindhu Reviewer of Synlett Chemistry

3 questions to Sumrit Wacharasindhu

1.) What criteria should an article meet to be successfully published in a reputable scientific journal?

The article should report a clear result with sufficient supporting information. Author should also focus on the experimental section. The data should be reliable and repeatable. The novelty should be highlighted. Author should select an appropriate journal for the research work to access the right audience. This will lead to effective citation and connection with peers.  

2.) What motivates you to be a peer reviewer?

Being a reviewer gives me an opportunity to stay up to date with the latest advances in chemistry, which I appreciate very much. The field is moving rapidly and becoming much more diverse. It is exciting to see cross disciplinary integration and the new frontier it will create. 

3.) Why is reviewing fun? Is it fun at all?

It is fun to be in the know before the article is released to the public domain. I think it is a privilege. It is an honor to be chosen as a reviewer. I enjoy the experience very much. 


Editorial Office Phone:+49 711 8931 744 Fax:+49 711 8931 777 Send e-mail