Volume 27: 2014

Peer Reviewed Papers
January 28, 2014

Hydrogen Production Using Solar Energy
Jeremiah F. Wilson, Sesha S. Srinivasan, Bria M. Moore, Lamont Henderson, Sammie Ely III, P. C. Sharma

How Tongue Size and Roughness Affect Lapping
M. J. Hubbard and K. M. Hay

See Previous Issues

Becoming a Reviewer

Interested in reviewing a paper for JURP? Reviewing provides a stellar resume addition, but it also helps students learn how to critically read journal articles. Reviewing a paper also helps students develop communication skills in a different way than writing does. If a student is contemplating writing a paper for his or her research, reviewing a paper (or papers) can provide an excellent foundation.

We have also allowed classes to participate in reviewing articles - if you're a professor and interested in incorporating reviewing JURP papers into a paper on physics publication, please email us.


To review a manuscript, you must either be a current or recent undergraduate physics student. We ask all reviewers to work closely with a faculty mentor, so that you can be guided during the process. All JURP papers are meant to be for an audience of students with a junior or senior level of physics, but faculty mentors can help students critically evaluate all aspects of the paper.

What Can I Expect?

When you receive a notification that you been selected to review a manuscript, we ask that you complete your review process within three weeks if at all possible. We ask reviewers make constructive criticisms, and we encourage the practice of always finding something on which to compliment the author. You will make recommendations to the Editor, who will then pass along your recommendations to the author.

The author's name and institutional affiliation are shown on the paper, but authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. Therefore, you have an obligation of confidentiality. Throughout the review process all communication between reviewers and authors proceeds through the JURP editorial staff.

JURP has a pedagogical role besides its archival role. When authors use specialized jargon, insist that they define terms or offer explanations that build on the foundation the reader has from typical physics courses.

Some submissions may lie outside JURP's purpose, and sometimes you may need to advise that another journal might be more appropriate. Conversely, we define 'research' very broadly: vesides new knowledge, papers that demonstrate old things in new ways, papers with pedagogical value, or papers that show some important link between physics and the wider culture are all welcome. Correct reasoning, derivations, and procedures are neccessary but not sufficient conditions for publishing.

We also ask that all reviewers be professional in making comments. While it is the job of reviewers to insist on excellence in the physics and the communication, at the same time, please be gracious and respectful to the person behin the paper. The review process should be an uplifting learn experience for everyone involved, whether or not the paper is published.

Once the comments have been sent to the author, the manuscript will usually be revised. You may be contacted again to review the revision.


If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us!

Toni Sauncy, PhD, Editor
The Journal of Undergraduate Research in Physics
Society of Physics Students
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740
(301) 209-3013