Become a Journal Reviewer

(Download this application)

ASAHPERD Journal Reviewer Application

Please submit the completed application to:

Jean Ann Helm Allen and Patrick Shremshock, ASAHPERD Journal Co-Editors: [email protected]



  • Current member of ASAHPERD
  • Must have a terminal degree in an ASAHPERD field (i.e. health education/health promotion, physical education, adapted physical education, recreation, athletics/coaching, exercise science, etc.)
  • Have read and agree to the roles and responsibilities of an ASAHPERD Journal Reviewer


Roles and Responsibilities of an ASAHPERD Journal Reviewer

The purpose of peer review is not to demonstrate the reviewer’s proficiency in identifying flaws. Reviewers have the responsibility to identify strengths and provide constructive comments to help the author resolve weaknesses in the work.


  • You can reasonably expect to review one to three article submissions a year
  • The preferred time to review and return an article will be two weeks
  • You will work with the journal editors to submit the review paperwork


Peer-reviewer responsibilities toward authors:

  • Provide written, unbiased feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work, together with the documented basis for the reviewer’s opinion
  • Indicate whether the writing is clear, concise, and relevant and rating the work’s composition, scientific accuracy, originality, and interest to the journal’s readers
  • Avoid personal comments or criticism
  • Maintain the confidentiality of the review process: not sharing, discussing with third parties, or disclosing information from the reviewed paper

Peer-reviewer responsibilities to editors:

  • Notify the editor immediately if unable to review in a timely manner
  • Alert the editor about any potential conflict of interest and decline to review when a possibility of a conflict exists
  • Comply with the editor’s written instructions on the journal’s expectations for the scope, content, and quality of the review
  • Providing a thoughtful, fair, constructive, and informative critique of the submitted work
  • Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it
  • Recommend acceptance or rejection using whatever rating scale the editor deems most useful
  • Refrain from direct author contact

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Confidentiality. Material under review should not be shared or discussed with anyone outside the review process unless necessary and approved by the editor.

Constructive critique. Reviewer comments should acknowledge positive aspects of the material under review, identify negative aspects constructively, and indicate the improvements needed.

Competence. Reviewers who realize that their expertise is limited have a responsibility to make their degree of competence clear to the editor.

Impartiality and integrity. Reviewer comments and conclusions should be based on an objective and impartial consideration of the facts, exclusive of personal or professional bias.

Disclosure of conflict of interest. If reviewers have any interest that might interfere with an objective review, they should either decline the role of reviewer or disclose the conflict of interest to the editor.

Timeliness and responsiveness. Reviewers are responsible for acting promptly, adhering to the instructions for completing a review, and submitting it in a timely manner.


Name of Applicant: ____________________________________________________________

E-mail: _____________________________ Phone: __________________________________

Professional Field: ____________________________________________________________

Would you prefer a two year term or a four year term as a reviewer? ___________________

Signature: __________________________________         Date: ______________________