Peer review can be an important contribution to maintaining quality in journals. An editor who sends a paper out for peer review is seeking advice from someone who has expertise in the subject matter of the paper.

Reviewers, who have typically published in that same journal, have an obligation to make reasonable efforts in assessing the quality of the submission. For instance, a scientific paper might be checked for clarity and plausibility, and the results might be compared to others with which the reviewer is familiar. Since it is unreasonable, however, to expect the reviewer to duplicate an experiment or study, peer review is no guarantee of the quality of an individual paper; it merely improves the average quality of papers in a journal.

Reviewers have an obligation to remain objective. This standard is more difficult to maintain in specialized fields containing small numbers of researchers. The peer reviewer may have a conflict of interest in the sense that he or she may be competing for the same research dollars as the author of the submitted paper, and the decision on whether or not to publish the paper may in turn have an impact on the ability of the author to attract that money. See the Conflict of Interest module for more details.

Reviewers also have an obligation to maintain confidentiality. They are seeing information prior to its release to the rest of the research community. It is unethical to take advantage of this inside knowledge in papers, grant applications, etc., without the consent of the author. They should also seek permission from the journal editor before passing the paper on to a colleague for assistance in the reviewing process.