You can simply sign up with Publons and create a new account as a researcher. Or, sign up through orcid, and after you complete signing up, you can easily export CV via Export Publons Cv option at Dashboard on the left side of your screen.

You may indicate in your CV for which journal(s) your were active as peer reviewer.

Dear Pramod Gyawali your contribution is very helpful and answers my question. Thank you.

Dear Dr. Wolfgang R. Dick Thank you for your valuable comment

Choose wisely the journals, some will give you certificate as a reviewer and some will publish your name as a reviewer in main article. Ofcourse reflect those activities in your CV.

Dear Abhijeet shankar Kashyap Thank you for the hint. I am going to do so.

The journal provide certificate as a reviewer and they will also publish your name as a reviewer in main manuscript. Those activities you can put in your CV Hend Ahmed Hamed

Dear Dr Hend Ahmed Hamed .Just add a peer reviewer section on the publication part of the CV, then add the name of the journal, year, and the number of publications. No need to add the name of the article and writers, just the number of reviews in any given year. Thank you.

Just put the name of your J. publications in standard syntax ( Pub name , Year Name of J ,Author ,Vol , ) .

Thank you Dr. Aref for your contribution

Thank you dear Jaydip

I have a few suggestions.

• Only list your reviews for top-tiered journals/conferences.
• Only list the journal/conference titles or title abbreviations (without specific article information, but you can optionally add the year and how many times you reviewed for the journal/conferences).
• If you serve as TPC members or conference PCs, list these activities seperately.

Have a good day~

You can list the journals you have been reviewing for and if necessary give a link for verification

Thank you Xovee Xu your suggestions are really beneficial.

Hend Ahmed Hamed You are welcome. I forget another tip:

Different disciplines have different ways to list reviewing activities. Thus I recommend you directly find those influnencial professors and find their public cv in the homepage, and see how they list the reviewing activities.

I think you need to create a sub-section in your CV then write down the journals or conference names where you offer review services.

Create a subsection in CV and provide your reviewer certificate IDs.

Thank you Dear Vincent and Shuraik

It's a good idea

Both Publons and ORCID have identifiers which could be added to your CV

In the peer-reviewed section of the publication, you just need to write the number of reviewed papers and year with the Journal name. There is no need to write the title of the paper that is reviewed by you. ORCID and Publons both are authentic sites and are to be added to CV for authenticity.

First, reviewing gives you an early look at some of the very freshest work in your field

You’ll read and think carefully about new hypotheses, new methods, new data, and new interpretations – and this can only strengthen your own approach to your work. Yes, preprinting in some disciplines has reduced this advantage, as many manuscripts are public before they enter the peer-review system; but until preprinting becomes universal there will be value in early exposure to your colleagues’ most recent progress.

Second, reviewing is a chance to engage deeply and critically (but constructively!) with writing

You’ll think carefully about the way the authors presented their work: their choice of content, their organization, their writing style, their designs for figures and tables. You’ll find good choices you can emulate, and mistakes you can avoid, in your own academic writing. It’s true that you can think carefully and thoroughly about anything you read; but you’re most likely to engage this way with some writing when you’re doing it deliberately to make written comments. And that’s exactly what peer reviewing is.

Third, reviewing can connect you with authors

Who can be grateful for your comments (if you sign your review), and with editors who will be grateful for your help. Building a network pays dividends, and an author or editor who remembers your thoughtful review may become a collaborator, a mentor, a source of advice, or just someone you can join for coffee and a chat at the next conference you attend. Yes, sadly, authors sometimes retaliate for an unfavourable review. At least early in your career, you might prefer to review anonymously – but you’re still building connections with editors. Those editors tend to be productive and influential scholars in your field. Don’t pass up chances to make connections like that.

Fourth, and for new authors perhaps most valuable, reviewing gives you a perspective on the publishing process

And that’s difficult to get any other way. You’ll see the draft manuscript to compare with the published version, of course; but in addition, you’ll (very often) see comments from the other reviewers, the decision letter from the editor, and the authors’ Response letter that accompanies the revision. As you steer your own manuscripts through the review process, you can learn from seeing how other authors handled criticism of their drafts. Did they disagree with your critique, but express that disagreement so rationally and professionally that you were persuaded? At some point, you’ll probably want to pull off that trick yourself. Did they betray their irritation and sabotage their revision’s chances? Perhaps you can notice a rhetorical flourish that’s best avoided. Chances to see the whole submission-review-and-revision process play out are hard to come by – and they’re instructive.

I don’t want to suggest that benefit to your own career is the only reason to get involved in peer review. Your own career will depend on others reviewing your work, which makes it appropriate to offer roughly the same amount of review service in return. (Many academics follow a rough rule of thumb, reviewing 2-4 papers for each one they submit.)  There’s also a more direct reason. Peer review has two functions: helping journals with decisions to accept or reject, yes; but also helping authors improve their manuscripts. We often focus on the gatekeeping function; but since most manuscripts are eventually published somewhere, the manuscript-improvement function is probably more important. I’ve felt a lot of satisfaction, over the years, that my reviews have helped authors publish better science – just as others have helped me publish better science through their reviews.

By the way, once you’ve reviewed a time or two, you’ll probably get more invitations than you can comfortably manage. It’s perfectly appropriate to turn some down; all of us do. You can review the manuscripts that are closest to your own work or those you find most interesting. Or, if you’re reluctant to provide a review service to a for-profit publisher, you can accept invitations from society-run and other non-profit journals. You won’t be short on opportunities.

Review is a contribution to original research works, so the plagiarism is to be excluded.