| 5 | -- | 7 | Michael Willis. Why do peer reviewers decline to review manuscripts? A study of reviewer invitation responses |
| 9 | -- | 12 | Bo-Christer Björk, Paul Catani. Peer review in megajournals compared with traditional scholarly journals: Does it make a difference? |
| 13 | -- | 21 | Michael Jubb. Peer review: The current landscape and future trends |
| 23 | -- | 25 | Stephen R. Thompson, Julie Agel, Elena Losina. The JBJS Peer-Review Scoring Scale: A valid, reliable instrument for measuring the quality of peer review reports |
| 27 | -- | 29 | James Hartley, John Cowan, Nick Rushby. Peer choice - does reviewer self-selection work? |
| 31 | -- | 38 | David Nicholas, Jie Xu, Lifang Xu, Jing Su, Anthony Watkinson. Chinese researchers, scholarly communication behaviour and trust |
| 41 | -- | 50 | Verity Warne. Rewarding reviewers - sense or sensibility? A Wiley study explained |
| 51 | -- | 53 | Fiona Murphy. An update on peer review and research data |
| 55 | -- | 59 | Ruwaida M. Salem, Natalie M. Culbertson, Alison O'Connell. Process for selecting and implementing a manuscript management system: Experiences of a new peer-reviewed journal |
| 60 | -- | 63 | Brooks Hanson, Rebecca Lawrence, Alice Meadows, Laura Paglione. Early adopters of ORCID functionality enabling recognition of peer review: Two brief case studies |
| 65 | -- | 68 | Alison Baverstock. Is peer review still the content industry's upper house? |
| 69 | -- | 71 | Rebecca Kennison. Back to the future: (re)turning from peer review to peer engagement |