It is important to find a means to incorporate reviewing activities into the assessment of scientific performance, alongside conventional measures (Nature 465, 870–872; 2010).

Reviewing manuscripts is considered as a non-research task and is hard to reward. The Second International Symposium on Peer Reviewing, held last week in Florida, met to discuss how to overcome this gap (see http://www.sysconfer.org/ispr). Key topics included how to assess editors and publishers, as well as reviewers, and how to increase the reliability and value of peer review.

The way in which we evaluate other scientists' work through fair, helpful and critical analysis is essential to science and deserves better recognition.