This journal uses a single-blind model of peer review.
Viewpoints are reviewed by the Editorial Board.
Introductory resources for peer reviewers can be found on Cambridge Core here.
Please note these important ethical guidelines all reviewers are asked to follow.
Before accepting this invitation reviewers should consider whether there are any conflicts of interest/competing interests: these are situations that could be perceived to exert an undue influence on your review. If they are uncertain or wish to discuss potential conflicts please contact the Editors.
Reviewers should treat any assignment, the manuscript and their review as confidential. Reviewers must not share their review or information about the review process with anyone without the agreement of the editors and authors involved, even after publication. This also applies to other reviewers' "comments to author" which are shared with reviewers on decision (and vice versa).
If reviewers suspect plagiarism, fraud or have other ethical concerns, they should raise their suspicions with the editor, providing as much detail as possible.
Any suggestion reviewers make that the author include citations to their (or their associates') work must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing their citation counts or enhancing the visibility of their work (or those of their associates).