Free · anonymous · for researchers worldwide
Share the reviewer comments you received, anonymously
Peer review happens behind closed doors, so every researcher starts guessing what a journal’s reviewers and editors expect. Your comments can change that. Paste the reviewer comments or editor decision from any submission, accepted, revised or rejected, and help the next researcher prepare better.
Live counts, updated 16 October 2026
Recently shared by researchers
“Unrealistic simulation results without experimental validation and inconsistencies with established P3HT device physics. Lack of clarity (simulation v…”
“Due to high submissions and strict selectivity, your paper did not fit their scope or priority.”
“Rejection on 28th June: Thank you for your submission to Semiconductor Science and Technology. We have read your manuscript and decided that it does n…”
“I do thank you for your submission to IJMR which I have now intensively checked myself. Actually while well written, I noticed that you present a pure…”
“your manuscript has been rejected by the Editorial Office of Kovove Materialy-Metallic Materials. Design and Analysis of Two-Dimensional Perovskites B…”
“Editor comments (if applicable): While your results are of potential interest, the topic of your manuscript falls outside of the scope of this jour…”
“While your results are of potential interest, the topic of your manuscript falls outside of the scope of this journal. For an overview of the Aims & S…”
“After consulting members of the editorial board, we reached the conclusion that the content of your paper will be outside the main focus of interest f…”
“Reject on 21 June 2025 I am therefore afraid that this paper has not been found suitable for publication in the Wiley Journal of Optimal Control, Appl…”
“Based on the initial reviews from two members of the ITDM Advisory Board, your paper has not much contribution to the domain of the ITDM knowledge. Th…”
“Rejection on 27 Apr 25: We want to express our appreciation for your manuscript submission to the Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering. After c…”
“analytical/theoretical justification, insufficient novelty, and no experimental validation,”
“Unrealistic simulation results without experimental validation and inconsistencies with established P3HT device physics. Lack of clarity (simulation v…”
“Due to high submissions and strict selectivity, your paper did not fit their scope or priority.”
“Rejection on 28th June: Thank you for your submission to Semiconductor Science and Technology. We have read your manuscript and decided that it does n…”
“I do thank you for your submission to IJMR which I have now intensively checked myself. Actually while well written, I noticed that you present a pure…”
“your manuscript has been rejected by the Editorial Office of Kovove Materialy-Metallic Materials. Design and Analysis of Two-Dimensional Perovskites B…”
“Editor comments (if applicable): While your results are of potential interest, the topic of your manuscript falls outside of the scope of this jour…”
“While your results are of potential interest, the topic of your manuscript falls outside of the scope of this journal. For an overview of the Aims & S…”
“After consulting members of the editorial board, we reached the conclusion that the content of your paper will be outside the main focus of interest f…”
“Reject on 21 June 2025 I am therefore afraid that this paper has not been found suitable for publication in the Wiley Journal of Optimal Control, Appl…”
“Based on the initial reviews from two members of the ITDM Advisory Board, your paper has not much contribution to the domain of the ITDM knowledge. Th…”
“Rejection on 27 Apr 25: We want to express our appreciation for your manuscript submission to the Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering. After c…”
“analytical/theoretical justification, insufficient novelty, and no experimental validation,”
Why share your reviewer comments?
Every manuscript that goes through peer review produces knowledge that usually stays in one inbox: what the reviewers asked for, why the editor said no, what convinced them to accept. Shared openly and anonymously, these peer review comments become a map for everyone submitting next.
Help the next researcher
A PhD student choosing a journal can see real reviewer comments and editor decisions before submitting, instead of guessing.
Make peer review transparent
Patterns appear: which journals desk reject for scope, which ask for baselines, which focus on language. Transparency improves research for all.
Turn a rejection into value
A rejection letter is frustrating. Shared, it saves others weeks of work, and every rejection reason becomes a lesson for the community.
Give back in one minute
No account, no upload, no email. Pick the journal, paste the comments, done. Your contribution is credited to “a researcher”, never to you.
How it works
- Pick the journalStart typing its name and choose it from the list.
- Paste the commentsCopy the reviewer comments or the editor’s decision from the email or the submission system. Add the outcome and, if you like, the weeks until the first decision.
- We anonymise and publishNames, titles, IDs and contact details are removed automatically. You immediately see the result and the pages where it will appear.
Your privacy comes first
Nothing that identifies you, your co-authors, your manuscript or the reviewers is published. Here is a real example of what the automatic anonymiser does:
What you paste
Dear Dr. Sharma, Manuscript ID CAEE-D-24-01234 entitled “Stable clustering for 5G VANET” has been reviewed. Reviewer 1: The comparison with recent state-of-the-art methods is missing. Contact: sharma@uni.edu. Best regards, Prof. Rao
What is published
Manuscript [ID] entitled [manuscript title] has been reviewed. Reviewer 1: The comparison with recent state-of-the-art methods is missing.
Names removedTitles removedEmails & links removedManuscript IDs removedSignatures removedChecked before publishing
Where your comments help researchers
On the journal’s page
Under “Reviewer comments and rejection reasons”, next to its indexing and real published papers.
On research-topic pages
“What reviewers ask in … papers”, so researchers in your field see common reviewer requests.
In open statistics
Anonymous counts of the most common reasons for rejection and what reviewers comment on.
Frequently asked questions
Is sharing my reviewer comments really anonymous?
Yes. You do not create an account and we do not publish who shared. Before anything is stored, names, manuscript titles, emails, links, phone numbers, manuscript IDs, greetings and signatures are removed automatically, and each submission is checked before it is published. Only the journal name, the outcome and the comments themselves appear.
Am I allowed to share reviewer comments publicly?
Many journals ask authors to keep the peer-review process confidential, and policies differ. Sharing short, anonymised comments that do not identify the manuscript, the authors or the reviewers is how most researchers discuss review experiences, but if your journal’s policy forbids it, please do not share. You can also share only the editor’s decision and the reasons given.
What happens after I submit?
You immediately see exactly what will be published and the pages where it will appear, plus a private link to check the status. After a quick check, usually within a day or two, the comments appear on the journal’s page on ScholarsColab and in the overall statistics.
Can I share comments from an accepted paper or a revision?
Yes, please do. Comments from accepted papers and revision requests are just as useful: they show what reviewers at that journal value. Choose the outcome in the form so readers can see it.
Do I need to register or give my email?
No. Sharing needs no account and no email address. If you want alerts when others share feedback for a journal, you can subscribe separately on that journal’s page.
Why is there no file upload?
To keep sharing fast and private: a pasted text can be anonymised reliably, while uploaded documents often contain hidden names, comments and metadata. Copy the reviewer comments from the email or the submission system and paste them into the box.
Can I remove something I shared?
Yes. Email support@scholarscolab.com with your private tracking link (shown after you submit) and we will remove it.
How are the shared comments used?
They appear on the journal’s page under “Reviewer comments and rejection reasons”, on related research-topic pages, and in anonymous statistics such as the most common reasons for rejection. They are never sold.