PsyPeerReviewer-peer review tool for psychologists.

Example

If a manuscript’s Introduction lacks clarity or fails to pose a well-informed research question, PsyPeerReviewer identifies this gap and suggests adding more theoretical background.

Scenario

A researcher submits a paper to PsyPeerReviewer. After reviewing the Introduction, the system notes that while the study’s importance is hinted at, the research question is unclear. It recommends the author include more details on how the study contributes to existing literature, improving the manuscript’s relevance and logical flow.

Example

PsyPeerReviewer identifies errors such as incorrect citations, improper reference formatting, or inconsistencies in tables and figures. It provides specific guidance on how to fix these issues according to APA Style 7.

Scenario

An author has formatted their paper’s references incorrectly, using MLA instead of APA. PsyPeerReviewer highlights the discrepancies in the reference list and suggests how to reformat citations and references, pointing out errors like missing DOIs or incorrect capitalization.

Example

In the Methods section, if PsyPeerReviewer detects that the sampling process lacks transparency or the psychometric properties of instruments are underreported, it flags these issues.

Scenario

A researcher submits a manuscript with a Method section that describes the procedure but lacks details on the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments. PsyPeerReviewer recommends including specific psychometric data and a more transparent description of how participants were recruited to improve methodological rigor.