Sir

Eugene Koonin's suggestion in Correspondence (Nature 422, 374; 200310.1038/422374c) that a journal should reward swift peer-reviewers by equally swiftly processing any articles that they themselves submit is an interesting one. Perhaps the converse should apply too: submissions from those who persistently underperform as reviewers should have their own work reviewed on a slower timescale.

An alternative reward system for good reviewers can be used in the open-access model of publishing, in which authors of accepted articles pay a processing charge so that there are no subscription or access charges to the journal. In this model, swift reviewers can be rewarded by a reduction in this charge. A twist is applied by some journals published by Berkeley Electronic Press (http://www.bepress.com), in which submitting authors do not have to pay the processing charge if they contract to provide a timely review of an agreed number of papers. But they do have to provide credit-card details and are subsequently charged if they fail to deliver their reviews on time.