Gatekeepers or Nightmares? Exploring Academics' Experiences With the Reviewer 2 Phenomenon

ABSTRACT This study investigates the experiences of 93 academics with Reviewer 2 through a phenomenological research design. Data were collected through an opinion form and analysed using descriptive and content analysis to uncover themes, subthemes and codes. The findings revealed that Reviewer 2 is often perceived as a source of unconstructive, harsh and emotionally damaging feedback, marked by an inappropriate tone, limited subject expertise and vague or unsupported critiques. These dynamics particularly affect early career researchers, women and scholars from less prestigious institutions. Emotional consequences included burnout, self‐doubt and disengagement from the publishing process. Nonetheless, academics employed coping strategies such as depersonalizing feedback, selective engagement and editorial appeals. The study reframes Reviewer 2 as symptomatic of systemic gatekeeping in academia, highlighting structural peer review flaws while proposing concrete improvements to enhance fairness and support in academic publishing.