Read Wiley's Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics.
By accepting an invitation to review with a Wiley journal, reviewers agree to act in accordance with generally accepted publication ethics and best practices (including the Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics COPE). Wiley supports and follows these guidelines as well. The reviewer also understands that good quality manuscripts that were not found to be suitable for a particular journal may be referred to journals in a similar subject area within Wiley’s network. Such manuscripts and their peer review reports will be transferred to the receiving journal to expedite any further evaluation and the editor's decision. The reviewer grants Wiley the right to re-use the peer review reports in order to provide publishing services, such as the transfer of manuscripts. This will be done in accordance with both journal and COPE guidelines. The reviewer also consents to the possible transfer of their name, email, and review to a relevant alternate journal. In cases where a manuscript has been transferred from a journal that does not participate in Transparent Peer Review to a journal that does, any reviews submitted to the original journal will not be transferred.
Wiley is a member of COPE and is committed to supporting reviewers, authors and editors in ensuring integrity across all aspects of the publishing process. COPE's Core Practices are at the center of our publication workflows and inform our work in protecting confidentiality throughout peer review. Accordingly, we expect all peer reviewers to respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or communications related to it, during or after the peer review process, beyond those that are released by the journal. For journals with single-, double- or triple-anonymized review models, this confidentiality obligation extends to the review and all communications regarding the review. This includes not uploading manuscripts (or any parts of manuscripts including figures and tables) into Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT and others based on large language models (LLMs) because this could infringe upon rights of confidentiality, privacy and copyright; see STM guidance here. If such tools are used to improve a peer review report, then they must be transparently declared in the report.
We also require that authors respect the confidentiality of the peer review process, unless the journal has adopted an open review policy. Journals with open review policies will have this noted within their Author Guidelines.