What action should reviewers take if they have a conflict of interest?

Reviewers encountering a conflict of interest must recuse themselves from the review process. Recusal is crucial because a conflict of interest can compromise the objectivity of the review, potentially leading to biased evaluations that would undermine the integrity of the publication process. By stepping aside, the reviewer ensures that the evaluation remains fair and impartial, maintaining the credibility of both the review and the scientific work being evaluated.

In situations where a reviewer might have financial ties, personal relationships, or affiliations that could influence their judgment, it is essential to prioritize transparency and ethical standards. This action fosters trust in the peer review process and upholds the values of scientific integrity.

Other potential actions, such as publicly disclosing a conflict or requesting a longer review period, do not adequately mitigate the risks associated with a conflict of interest. Disclosure can raise questions about the reviewer’s judgment, and simply seeking more time does not address the underlying issue of bias. Hence, recusal is the most appropriate and responsible action to maintain the integrity of the review process.