Leo, MD, associate professor of clinical psychiatry, UB College of Biomedical and Medication Sciences; E. Alison Holman, PhD, assistant professor of nursing sciences, UC Irvine; and Roxane Cohen Silver, PhD, professor of psychology and sociable behavior and medicine, UC Irvine. The study sample was drawn from a representative web-allowed nationally, population-based panel made through traditional probability sampling techniques such as for example random-digit dialing by Knowledge Networks, Inc.One is certainly that in specific fields, authors may be best qualified to recommend suitable reviewers for the topic and manuscript in question. Another is definitely that it creates life much easier for editors: finding appropriate peer reviewers who are willing to review in a timely manner can be both tough and frustrating. A third reason may be that journals and publishers are increasingly multinational. In the past, the editor and editorial board of a journal knew both scientific field it protected and the people employed in it, but it’s extremely difficult to be sufficiently well linked when both editors and submissions come from around the globe. Having authors suggest the best reviewers may seem just like a good idea therefore. In the aftermath of the recent scandals involving fake peer reviewers, many journals are determined to carefully turn off the reviewer-recommendation option on the manuscript-submission systems.