Peer Review Excellence: A Reviewer's Guide to OJS

Accepting invitations, uploading assessments, and writing effective feedback

Abstract

Peer review is the cornerstone of scholarly publishing, and OJS provides reviewers with a dedicated, straightforward interface for completing their assessments efficiently. Yet many reviewers — particularly those new to OJS or accustomed to older systems — struggle with the invitation acceptance process, file download, and structured feedback forms. This guide demystifies the reviewer experience in OJS 3.5.

We begin with the invitation email: what to look for, how to accept or decline gracefully, and how to request an extension when needed. We then walk through the reviewer interface step by step — downloading the anonymised manuscript, accessing supplementary files, using the structured review form, and uploading annotated documents. We pay particular attention to the distinction between reviewer files (shared with editors only) and review comments (visible to authors after the decision), which is a frequent source of confusion.

The guide concludes with best-practice advice for constructive reviewing: organising your assessment around significance, rigour, clarity, and contribution; providing line-specific comments efficiently; and managing competing commitments by using OJS's declined-invitation workflow to protect both your time and the author's expectation of a timely decision.