Fengkai Group Co., Limited
PHD Peer Review Need – Automation & Control Systems
How your CV stacks up
Upload your CV to see how well it fits this job role
?%
PHD Peer Review Need – Automation & Control Systems
Peer Reviewer (Science/Engineering Social Sciences) – Remote, Part-Time
The role is a long-term, stable part-time position in academic peer review, supporting remote work on a flexible basis.
Requirements
Essential eligibility criteria:
- Doctorate (PhD or equivalent advanced degree) in a relevant subject area.
- Publication trail: At least five papers published in SCI/SSCI-indexed journals within the past three years. Blanks, low-impact articles, or duplications (e.g. letters, reproductions) will disqualify.
- Deep understanding of research methodologies and ethical principles in your discipline.
- Exemplary research data management (e.g. transparency about open datasets, replication protocols).
- Analytical rigor: Skilled at unearthing hidden flaws in study design, interpretation, or methodology.
- Comprehensive command of academic writing conventions—able to articulate technical and substantive critiques lucidly.
- Proven time-management discipline with a track record for adhering to tight deadlines (submissions due 3 weeks from accession).
- Absolute reliability to uphold peer review standards —wholehearted commitment to fairness, confidentiality, and subjectivity, with no bias towards/against labs, funding sources, or geographical origin.
- Digital literacies: Exam submission systems (e.g., ScholarOne, Open Journal Systems), LaTeX/PDF markup familiarity.
Reasons to use Rodeo
Start with a chat, not a search bar
Grad scheme, placement, apprenticeship? Not sure what you want yet — that's fine. Your agent talks it through with you and turns "I have no idea" into a shortlist.
It searches the market for you
Every day your agent scans the market matching roles against what actually matters to you, not just keywords on a CV.
Only hits
No noise. No "maybe this fits." Just roles with a clear explanation of why they're right — and where to focus when applying.
Highly desirable:
- Prior track record as a peer reviewer for at least three journals (academic history verifiable on Publons/ORCID).
- Experience reviewing work in multiple study areas beyond your own—for cross-disciplinary expertise.
- Methodologies outside your core expertise (e.g. systematic reviews, meta-analysis, repeated measures statistical tests).
- Colleagues to reference who could attest to your rigorous peer-review contributions.
Role Scope
Quality assurance: Your work directly supports journals in safeguarding scientific integrity by:
- Novelty evaluation: Detecting limited or incremental contributions without substantive “incremental new knowledge.”
- Review of study design and rationale: Questions on— Sample size justifications. Statistical power checks. Best practices in bias reduction. Ethical considerations (e.g. informed consent forms, data ownership agreements).
- Literature appraisals: Viral priority criteria identification (does it fill key gaps cited in the introduction?) and avoidative use of cherry-picked citations or inflated claims.
- Results presentation audits: T площадtionack for opinion-bias in summaries; detection of inconsistencies with raw data.
- Critical review of discussions: In particular papers funded by industry, grant-program allocating bodies, or with perceived conflicts: Tests whether conclusions clearly reflect the authors’ evidence rather than speculative overreach or PR priorities.
Get help with your application
Your very own career expert that helps elevate your application to the next level.
During the review, you will provide:
- Clear criteria-based feedback: Written comments that assist editors and authors—no unfocused me-too feedback.
- Per-question rating grades (optionally, numerical scales perpendicular to the common “major/minor/recommend revision” model) at your discretion.
- Where applicable: Tracks of trends among submissions (e.g. most screens for x, most often lacks transparent provenance testing).
- No jurisdiction over prior standalone disputes regarding patent cherry-picking and dual-lab collaborative paperwork.
After assessment, expect to see revisions in high-impact manuscripts (strongest papers need more focus on reproducibility)
Essential Observances
- Confidentiality: Never share comments with the submitting author(s), nor affiliates, until final acceptance.
- Reference integrity: By default, refer all queries/submissions through the portal Submission Manager email canonical (“EduEditor@[journal].com”).
- Deadlines: Turnaround targets will be 1–3 weeks. Proquest-locked manuscripts are monitored for retraction keywords post-release.
Gradual ramp-up of workload on excellent performance; atypical assignments may compensate with overlapping swift-reply deadlines
“It took my CV and asked me questions relevant to understanding what kind of jobs to suggest for me. Suggestions were almost perfect. Jobs were exactly what I’ve been looking for.”
Jessica, London
Skills
Location