同儕審查的執行方式是找與作者相同或類似領域的學者來審閱這篇作品。審查人必須秉持高度的專業去執行審查任務，包括判定作品的創新性、品質與重要性等。在期刊論文的出版過程中，同儕審查的結果通常會決定一篇投稿論文能不能獲得刊登的機會。

1. The process of using experts within a scientific or academic discipline (or peers) to evaluate articles submitted for publication, grant proposals, or other materials.
2. Peer review is the process by which a piece of scientific research, such as a manuscript, a project, a grant proposal, or academic work is assessed by others – a researcher's fellow peers – who are suitably qualified and able to judge the piece of work under review in terms of novelty, soundness and significance. In general, it is a critique of submitted work.
3. The process that involves the consistent application of standards and procedures that produce fair, equitable, and objective examinations of applications based on an evaluation of scientific or technical merit or other relevant aspects of the application. The review is performed by experts (Peer Reviewers) in the field of endeavor for which support is requested.

1. 周倩（2020）。學術界的同儕審查（peer review）制度與審查者（reviewer）的責任。科技部研究誠信電子報，37，1–12。 https://www.nstc.gov.tw/nstc/attachments/5edfd55f-915e-4996-8e01-eb3b8b67d7b0?
2. Resnik, D. B. (2015). Glossary of commonly used terms in research ethics. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/glossary/index.cfm
3. European Network for Academic Integrity. (2018).Glossary for academic integrity: Revised version. European Network forAcademic Integrity. https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/EN-Glossary_revised_final_24.02.23.pdf
4. National Institutes of Health. (2021). NIH Grants policy statement. National Institutes of Health. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/HTML5/section_1/1.2_definition_of_terms.htm

• 原則上「單字中英文釋義」欄位的內容皆採用原文引用（即未經改寫），僅少部分內容有經微幅文字編輯。若欲對釋義內容有更深入的瞭解，敬請參考「資料來源」欄位所提供之原始出處的完整內容。
• 資料來源無編號：代表釋義內容出自同一筆來源。
• 資料來源有項目符號：代表釋義內容是引用多筆來源合寫而成。
• 資料來源有編號：代表該來源是相同編號之釋義內容的原始出處。