Skip to main content
Basic Technical IVT Commonly tested

Reviewer Assignment Strategy

noun

Pronunciation: /rɪˈvjuːər əˈsaɪnmənt ˈstrætədʒi/

The systematic approach used by editors to select and allocate qualified peer reviewers for specific manuscripts based on expertise, availability, and conflict-of-interest considerations. Effective strategies ensure rigorous, unbiased evaluation by appropriate subject matter experts.

Plain English

The method editors use to choose the right experts to review each research paper.

Etymology & History

Origin languageEnglish
Rootstrategy from Greek strategia (generalship)
First recorded use1980s
Usage frequencyCommon

Usage

"The journal's reviewer assignment strategy prioritizes matching manuscript topics with reviewers who have recent publication records in those areas."

Style guide notes: Use 'strategy' when describing systematic approaches; use 'process' for operational implementation.

Also known as

reviewer selection protocol peer reviewer allocation expert assignment process

Contrasted with

random reviewer selection ad hoc assignment

Related Terms

Frequently Asked Questions

What factors influence reviewer assignment strategy?

Expertise match, publication history, conflict of interest, reviewer availability, and geographic diversity.

How do journals prevent bias in reviewer assignment?

Using automated systems, maintaining diverse reviewer databases, and implementing conflict-of-interest screening.

Why Test Candidates on This?

Critical for understanding editorial efficiency and quality control in peer review processes.

Required skill level: Mid

Editors from these organisations have used our services since 1998

Reuters BBC Oxford University Press Penguin Random House Springer Microsoft Suncor Energy United Nations Fisher Investments IBM The Home Depot KODAK CHEVRON