A Manifesto for an Inclusive and Equitable Peer Review Culture in Psychology

Peer review is central to the credibility and advancement of science, yet it has long been shaped by exclusionary practices that narrow who participates, what counts as evidence, and which questions are seen as worth asking. This paper delineates the anatomy of a positive peer review in psychology, emphasizing clarity, structure, consistency, specificity, constructive tone, vigilance against bias, integrity, relevance, timeliness, and place-centeredness. Drawing on metascientific principles, we synthesize practical guidance for reviewers, editors, and authors, including the use of structured review prompts, explicit checks for analytic flexibility and adequacy of power, attention to sampling frames and context, and expectations for sharing data, code, and materials when ethically feasible. We also outline editorial policies that realign incentives toward inclusion and rigor, such as adopting formats that foreground methods and transparency, implementing calibrated decision criteria, and providing developmental feedback that supports authors at different stages and from diverse settings. Finally, we propose concrete steps for training, recognition, and accountability in review, along with indicators that departments, journals, and societies can track to monitor progress. Taken together, these practices reposition peer review as a tool for equity and quality in psychological science and as a lever for improving how research is disseminated.