The MacEwan University Student eJournal (MUSe) publishes select works of MacEwan University students that have passed a rigorous peer-review process.
Interested in submitting your work to MUSe? Check out our Author Guidelines.
Golden Rule: “Review for others as you would have others review for you” (McPeek et al., 2009, P. E157).
The following page outlines how to conduct a peer review for MUSe. Interested in becoming a student peer reviewer? Visit Become a Peer Reviewer.
Starting a Peer Review
Upon receiving an email request to peer review a work, log into the MUSe website to check the review deadline and accept or decline the request.
After accepting a request and while logged into the site, you will be able to view a copy of the work.
Begin by going through the submission once, noting your initial impressions or thoughts. Next, go over it a second time more critically and begin to formulate your review in accordance with the guidelines detailed below. Once you’ve written your review, you may wish to check the submission a third time to make sure the information in your review is accurate.
Each time you analyze the work, remember that as a reviewer for MUSe, your goal is to provide the author or creator with effective, constructive feedback, and the editor with a reasonably detailed evaluation of the work. You are here to determine whether it is suitable for publication, as well as if there are areas for improvement.
Filling out the Peer Review Form
When you are ready to provide written feedback, fill out the MUSe peer review form or a separate document with your feedback (as specified by your Section Editor), which should contain the following sections:
It is good practice to number each item in your review so that your comments are easy to follow.
When complete read (and spellcheck) your peer review!
Remember: Keep the contents of any manuscript you’re reviewing confidential. Do not discuss the manuscript or its contents with others.
Here are some key questions to consider when reviewing research papers (not all questions may apply):
Here are some key questions to consider when reviewing artist statements or statements of inspiration submitted alongside creative submissions including works like paintings, graphic design, songs, films, poetry, and short stories (not all questions may apply):
Cambridge University Press. (n.d.). A guide to peer reviewing journal articles. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-file-manager/file/5a1eb62e67f405260662a0df/Refreshed-Guide-Peer-Review-Journal.pdf
McPeek, M. A., DeAngelis, D. L., Shaw, R. G., Moore, A. J., Rausher, M. D., Strong, D. R., Ellison, A. M., Barrett, L., Rieseberg, L., Breed, M. D., Sullivan, J., Osenberg, C. W., Holyoak, M., & Elgar, M. A. (2009). The golden rule of reviewing. The American Naturalist, 173(5), E155–E158. https://doi.org/10.1086/598847
PLOS. (n.d.). For reviewers. https://plos.org/resources/for-reviewers/
Publons. (2019). How to write a peer review: 12 things you need to know. https://publons.com/blog/how-to-write-a-peer-review-12-things-you-need-to-know/