The peer reviewer, evaluated

It is well known that research works are very often published and divulged in some specialized journals. It is also well known that many of them have adopted the peer review system (in its different forms). Thus, this system has become an integral part of academic discipline development. The peer review system is considered to ensure the quality of what is published (removing defective or erroneous works) and to promote the journal's prestige. Nevertheless, whilst this is true, it cannot be denied that this very system leaves the door open to spurious, dishonest, imprudent, or unwise practices. Under such circumstances, it is appropriate to consider the best way to put an end to these practices. Thus, this article aims to help improve the peer review system. The methodology consisted in revising several reviewers' reports (in order to detect unacceptable practices) and the literature on the peer review system. From these sources a critical analysis is developed, and a possible solution is presented. My proposal in this article is to assess the reviewers, so that we can be able to detect the most flagrant cases and take all necessary measures to marginalize them. There are different evaluation proposals. What is being proposed here is that authors should respond to a survey examining the work performed by the reviewers. The survey would be anonymous, and the reviewer would be identified by a code, to ensure the protection of their identity.