Scholarly peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field, before a paper describing this work is published in a journal or as a book. The peer review helps the publisher (that is, the editor-in-chief or the editorial board) deciding whether the work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or rejected. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish; and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Peer review is generally considered necessary to academic quality and is used in most major scientific journals, but does by no means prevent publication of all invalid research.
Post publication peer review – standard peer review, but after a research article has been formally published.
Transferable peer review – reviews that travel with a paper if it is rejected from a journal. (Wiley pilot)
Open review – when reviews are made openly available, typically alongside the article.
Signed peer review – when the individual reviews are publicly signed by those who conducted them.
Portable peer review – independent peer review that travels with a manuscript that is submitted to subsequent different journals, designed to combat redundancy in the peer review process. (Rubriq)
Double blind peer review – when the reviewers don’t know who the authors are, and vice versa.
Registered Reports – A type of publication in which peer review of the suggested method is completed prior to data collection and analysis. Accepted papers then are guaranteed publication in the journal if the authors follow through with the registered methodology. (Source)
Peer Review in 3 Minutes