Researchers assess researchers – peer review
The Swedish Research Council uses peer review to assess the scientific quality of the applications and the potential of the research. Peer review involves well-qualified researchers within the same or nearby subject areas scrutinising the applications. Peer review is used all around the world, is greatly trusted by researchers, and is considered to be the best way of ensuring applications receive a balanced and fair assessment.
Together with Swedish Research Council personnel, scientific councils, councils and committees put a lot of work into recruiting suitable experts to assess applications. Having a documented high level of scientific expertise is a requirement, and a prerequisite for well-functioning peer review.
How we safeguard the quality of assessment
The Swedish Research Council shall support research of the highest scientific quality within all scientific fields, and ensure that Swedish research is renewed. To ensure this is successful, it is important that the process for assessing applications is systematic and of high quality.
We have eight fundamental principles with associated guideliens for ensuring the assessment is conducted according to a sound assessment culture and good research practice. As a complement to these, we have also taken a position on the assessment of researcher merits. This position emphasises that the assessment of researcher merits shall be done on the basis of their relevance for the specific research project, and that the applicant has great responsibility themselves for including merits that are relevant in an application, and explaining why.
It is important that the handling of applications is objective and impartial, so that the best research ideas receive funding. All who take part in the assessment process must therefore follow the Swedish Research Council’s gender equality strategy and conflict of interest policy.
Work is carried out in review panels
The experts are members of review panels with various subject specialisations. We compose the review panels in such a way that the subject expertise of the members complement each other. This ensures each panel has a collective competence that covers all research fields in the applications. If the members of a review panel still do not consider themselves to have sufficient expertise to assess a particular application, they can get help from experts outside the panel, known as ‘external reviewers’.
Each review panel consists of five to fifteen persons from different higher education institutions (HEIs), and is led by a chair. The gender balance of the panel shall be even. Members are appointed for one year at a time, which can be extended for up to six years. The chair usually has a mandate period of three years maximum.
Researchers from several countries take part
Researchers from HEIs outside Sweden are included in nearly all review panels. They bring competence and an international perspective to the assessment of Swedish research. At the same time, recruiting panel members from other countries is a way of reducing the risk of conflicts of interest. For some calls, all the review panel members are international.
Equivalent assessment
All assessments shall be made in an equivalent manner. They shall be based on the scientific quality of the planned research, and on the competence of the applicant.
The applications are assessed according to the Swedish Research Council’s four basic criteria or a selection of these depending on the call:
- The scientific quality of the project,
- Novelty and originality,
- The merits of the applicant, and
- Feasibility.
When assessing some calls, these criteria are supplemented with specific additional criteria that are relevant for that particular call, such as relevance for a specific scientific field, or interdisciplinary added value.
We train and inform members and chairs of the review panels on how the assessment shall be conducted, and on the guidelines that apply. To help them in their work, they also have a review panel handbook, which is specific for each call. The handbook clarifies the assessment criteria by means of a number of guiding questions.
The peer review handbook is available on this website.
The review panel makes a joint assessment
To ensure each application receives a balanced and fair assessment, a minimum of three members will always read and grade it ahead of the review panel meeting. The review panel makes a joint assessment of each application at the review panel meeting. For some calls, the applications with the lowest grades from the members’ individual assessments are not discussed. The reason for this is to give sufficient time to discuss the applications of the highest quality, that have a realistic chance of being funded.
How the review panel meeting is conducted:
- One of the panel members who has read the application presents it to the other members of the review panel.
- The whole review panel discusses the application and agrees on a joint, final assessment.
- The review panel sets the grades based on all the assessment criteria for the particular call.
- A written statement is drawn up for each individual application (those that were not discussed at the meeting only receive a grade).
- The chair of the review panel leads the meeting, with the help of personnel from the Swedish Research Council. Together they ensure that the guidelines are followed and that the outcome of the meeting is documented. As part of the quality assurance process, in many cases observers from the Swedish Research Council’s scientific councils and committees are present at the meeting.
Scientific councils and committees make the decision
The decision whether to award a grant or not is based on the review panel’s joint assessment and how the application compares in competition with other applications, as well as other possible considerations, such as gender equality and success rates. The scientific council or committee responsible for the call makes the decision. Certain calls are decided on by the Swedish Research Council’s Director General.
All who have applied for a grant from us will receive the decision on their application via our application system Prisma. We also publish lists of the persons who have been awarded grants under each call on this website.
The assessment is followed up
We follow up the assessment process every year. For example, the review panel meetings always end with a discussion where the members have the opportunity to reflect and give feedback on various parts of the process. This feedback becomes part of the documentation used by the Swedish Research Council to optimise and develop our process for assessment of applications.
Eight principles to safeguard quality
The Swedish Research Council have produced eight fundamental principles for ensuring the scientific assessment is made within the framework for a sound assessment culture and good research practice.
1. Expertise in the review
The assessment of applications shall be carried out by experts with a documented high level of scientific competence within the research field/s or discipline/s the application relates to, and the scientific peer review shall be based on clear quality criteria. Reviewers shall be appointed according to clear criteria in a systematically documented process.
2. Objectivity and equal treatment
All assessments shall be carried out in an equivalent manner and be based on the quality of the research planned and executed and on the applicant’s merits, irrespective of the origins or identity of the applicant. To avoid any conflict of interest or partiality, assessments shall be based on clear quality criteria and formalised processes.
3. Promoting good research practice
The assessment assumes an ethical approach and high level of integrity. The subject experts shall not carry out any preliminary ethical review, but should take into account how the applicant discusses the research and formulates the research question with regard to good research practice. If an application includes research that clearly breaches ethical rules and/or clearly contravenes Swedish or international law, this should be reflected in the assessment of the quality and/or feasibility of the research.
4. Openness and transparency
The assessment shall be based on and justified by the documentation requested by the Swedish Research Council, which in a typical case is an application for grant funding. The assessment of the documentation shall be made based on rules and guidelines set in advance and publicly known.
5. Appropriateness for purpose
The peer review process shall be adapted to the call and the research area, and shall be proportional to the size and complexity of the call without neglecting the rule of law.
6. Efficiency
The total resources used in the application and assessment, in terms of both time used and cost, shall be minimised for all involved, i.e. applicants, subject experts and Swedish Research Council personnel, with consideration for maintaining quality, objectivity, transparency and appropriateness for purpose.
7. Integrity
All participants in the assessment process shall respect the integrity of the process and shall not disclose to any third party what has been discussed at the meeting or the opinion of other reviewers in the ongoing processing of applications. The final assessment shall always be documented and published once a decision has been made.
8. The peer review shall be prepared and followed up in a structured manner
Review processes shall be prepared and followed up according to clear criteria. All reviewers shall have access to the same type of background documentation for the review.
Guidelines describe how the principles shall be complied with
Each principle has a number of associated guidelines that provide support in the practical work of assessing the applications.
The principles and associated guidelines must be interpreted in relation to each individual call. All those who work with applications – administrators, subject experts in the review panels and decision-makers – discuss how the principles shall be applied in practice, for example if one principle conflicts with another.
Principles for peer review at the Swedish Research Council
Pdf, 125.9 kB.
Position on assessment of researcher merits
When assessing an application, the applicant’s (1) competence shall be considered in relation to their ability to successfully implement the research presented.
- The assessment of the applicant’s merits shall be done based on their relevance for the specific research project. This therefore differs from the assessments made in conjunction with, for example, job appointments, promotions, or annual salary reviews. The crucial fact is whether the information the applicant refers to makes it probable that the project can be implemented successfully.
- How well the applicant can be expected to implement the planned project is dependent on a number of abilities and competences, such as the applicant’s engagement, creativity, and experiences.
- Consequently, many different types of merits can be relevant over and above the previous research inputs that have a direct link to the area to be investigated; those that more generally indicate that the applicant has the scientific skills the research task requires, and, depending on the nature of the project, factors such as work leadership and the ability to collaborate.
The applicant (2) has great responsibility themselves for identifying which merits are relevant in an application, and for making their relevance clear. The reviewer will assess this based on their own expertise and the Swedish Research Council’s instructions.
- The assessment of the applicant’s merits shall be done based on their relevance for the research project in question. This does not exclude taking into account merits relating to previous research inputs, even if they relate to other areas than those the project is focused on. The important thing is that the applicant can justify that the merits referred to contribute to the expectation that the project can be successfully carried out.
- The applicant is responsible for ensuring the application includes sufficient and correct information about their merits to allow the reviewer to make a reliable assessment of the applicant’s ability to implement the project successfully.
- The reviewer is responsible for reviewing the merits provided by the applicant in accordance with the instructions for the specific call, and on the basis of this assess the applicant’s ability to implement the project successfully.
- The Swedish Research Council appoints reviewers with expertise of relevance to the call in question, and the relevant scientific field. The reviewers are supported in their work by the Swedish Research Council via instructions and training.
Peer-reviewed scientific publications are central in many fields, but other types of research outputs can also be of great importance for the assessment.
- Peer-reviewed scientific publications (such as journal articles, conference contributions, book chapters, and books, but also published summaries of research data and, in some cases, artistic works) are usually the central way of communicating research results in academia. The assessment of such merits should take into account how reliable the peer review used in the specific case can be assumed to be.
- In addition to published works that have been peer-reviewed, other examples of communication of research results, such as preprints, can also be taken into account. The assessment of such merits requires special care, and places specific demands on the reviewer in terms of knowledge of the relevant area.
- How research results in a field are published, what methods for peer review are used, and other relevant preconditions vary between different fields. The Swedish Research Council appoints reviewers with good understanding of the publication culture that applies within the field the applications reviewed relate to.
(1) Some calls refer to the applicants’ and the participants’ collective competence.
(2) Some calls refer to the applicants and the participants.
PublISHED ON
UpDATED ON