Internal Peer Review
The AHSS Peer Review Programme
Overview
The purpose of the internal peer review is to increase the chance of securing grant income by providing academics, from early career researchers through to senior professors, the opportunity to have their proposals reviewed by colleagues.
The peer review is not a selection mechanism – it does not prevent any proposals from submission.
The aim of the process is to improve the quality of applications in light of the increasingly competitive funding landscape. After two years the process will be evaluated to establish if it adds value to the current research support structures.
Request an Internal Peer Review
To be eligible for Internal Peer Review, your department must be a Member of the AHSS Peer Review Panel. Please see the list below of participating departments.
*Membership is contingent on the nomination of reviewers from your department. If you would like your department to participate in this process, please speak to your HoD to arrange reviewer nomination.
Members of the Internal Peer Review Panel, 2025-2027
Architecture | Professor Ying Jin |
| Architecture | Dr Carolina Vasilikou |
| CFI | Dr Maya Indira Ganesh |
Classics | Dr Laura Castelli |
| Classics | Professor Michael Squire |
| CRASSH | Professor Joanna Page |
| CSER | Dr Alana Weir |
| Education | Professor Karen Coats |
| Education | Dr Eva Hartmann |
| English | Professor Raphael Lyne |
| History | Dr Aled Davies |
| History | Professor Leigh Shaw Taylor |
| History of Art | Professor Caroline van Eck |
| HPS | Professor Tim Lewens |
| HPS | Dr Josh Nall |
| Land Economy | Professor Shaun Larcom |
Law | Professor Antje du Bois-Pedain |
| Law | Dr Emilija Leinarte |
| MMLL | Professor Henriette Hendriks |
| Social Anthropology | Professor Rebecca Cassidy |
| Social Anthropology | Dr Mike Degani |
1. Applications with a value of £500k+ at fEC are strongly encouraged to undergo peer review by the AHSS Peer Review Panel.
2. Peer Review Panel members will be contacted by the Research Facilitators and provided with the Applicant’s full application, along with budget and relevant scheme/funder guidance. If they are not able to provide a review, due to time constraints, they need to notify the Facilitators as early as possible.
3. Each proposal will be reviewed by three panel members, including at least one senior UTO.
4. The peer review is not discipline specific. Reviewers are likely to be asked to review proposals outside of their disciplinary remit and research interest. They will be looking for evidence that:
-
The research questions are important
-
The project design is clearly explained and feasible
-
The research team and the PI are ideally placed to conduct the research because of their skills and experience
5. Applications will be reviewed and returned to the applicants within four weeks of submission to Research Facilitators.
6. The process will be transparent, with the policy and process clearly detailed on the SAHSS Research website.
7. At the conclusion of the two-year pilot, the Research Facilitators will carry out a review of the process and report to the two Schools.
While training is provided for reviewers participating in the Internal Review Process, the ESRC has a number of helpful resources that may be useful to consult, including answers to the questions asked most frequently by peer reviewers about the Council's assessment process.
Please follow this link to the ESRC Peer Review website for further details.