What is a common practice in the peer review to ensure both quality and trustworthiness?

Utilizing multiple independent reviewers is a common practice in the peer review process that significantly contributes to both the quality and trustworthiness of scholarly publications. This approach ensures that the evaluation of a manuscript is comprehensive, as each reviewer brings their unique perspective, expertise, and critical insight to the table. By having multiple reviewers assess the same work, the likelihood of bias is reduced, and a more balanced, objective assessment is achieved.

Additionally, multiple independent reviewers can catch different issues or provide various suggestions for improvement, which ultimately enhances the overall integrity and robustness of the research findings. This collaborative effort fosters a more thorough critique, supporting a dependable and high-quality publication process that upholds scientific standards.

In contrast, revealing author identities to reviewers or allowing authors to choose their reviewers may compromise the impartiality of the review, and conducting a review without guidelines can lead to inconsistent evaluations and lower quality assessments. Therefore, relying on multiple independent reviewers is essential for maintaining the integrity of the peer review system.