To be a reviewer for our journals, you must have:

• Published at least 3 articles in refereed journals, with a minimum of 2 first-authored publications
• A PhD in a relevant field preferred, or a sufficient amount of relevant experience
• Read the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers available in English, Chinese, and Spanish
• An account on our ScholarOne Manuscripts Portal (any journal)

If you meet these criteria, please complete this form to be added to our journals' reviewer pool, or contact the Editorial Office with questions.

Consider taking one of the following free courses on becoming a peer-reviewer:

• Web of Science Academy - modules on peer review
• Wiley Peer Review Training
• Nature Masterclass: Focus on Peer Review

IFT’s journals use a reviewer-identity-hidden peer-review process, meaning that reviewers can see who the authors are, but authors do not know the identity of their reviewers. Reviewers are allowed to voluntarily identify themselves to the author in their comments if they so choose, but the journals will otherwise protect their identities.

Associate Editors search for reviewers based on expertise matching the submission, using the keywords and areas of expertise listed in the reviewer’s ScholarOne account, as well as outside resources such as publication history on Google Scholar.

Reviewers are given 3 weeks to complete a JFS or JFSE manuscript review on the first round, and 2 weeks on revised submissions. For CRFSFS, reviewers are given 4 weeks on the first round, due to longer manuscript size.

Reviewers complete a form with yes/no and rating scale questions and a text field to enter comments in the form. IFT’s journals do not allow for reviewer attachments, which can reveal the identity of the reviewer in the file metadata. You can save the review form as you go, so you can come back later to finish your work.

In addition to review by the Scientific and Associate Editors, we strive to secure at least 2 to 3 independent reviews for every manuscript submission that goes through the peer-review process. Sometimes, more reviews are needed.

Diversity & Inclusion: IFT’s has dedicated itself to three important pillars: diversity, inclusion, and equity, with the goal to leverage all three to advance our mission and the science of food. We are committed to fostering diverse and inclusive editorial boards, reviewer pools, and authorship of IFT’s scientific journals. Learn more about DEI at IFT.

The following situations are considered conflicts of interest for a reviewer. If you are invited to review a manuscript for which you have a conflict, please decline the invitation.

• Co-authoring publications with at least one of the authors in the past 3 years
• Collaborating on an active research project with at least 1 of the authors, including if the project has not yet resulted in publication
• Co-inventing with at least one of the authors on a patent application
• Being colleagues within the same section/department or similar organizational unit in the past 3 years
• Supervising/having supervised the doctoral work of the author (s) or being supervised/having been supervised by the author(s)
• Receiving professional or personal benefit resulting from the review
• Having a personal relationship (e.g. family, close friend) with the author(s)
• Having a direct or indirect financial interest in the paper being reviewed
  It is not considered a conflict of interest if the reviewers have worked together with the authors on a collaborative non-research project (e.g., an advisory committee) or if they have co-organized an event.