# Reviewing Work (https://terac.com/docs/researchers/results/reviewing-work)

The approval workflow for evaluating participant submissions, including manual review, screening review, and quality controls.

Reviewing submissions is how you ensure the quality of participant work. Terac provides multiple review methods to match different opportunity needs.

## Review Methods [#review-methods]

| Method            | Description                                                                                                                                | Best For                                     |
| ----------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------- |
| **Manual review** | The submission waits in Work review until you approve or reject it                                                                         | Complex or nuanced work                      |
| **Auto-approve**  | A `completed` redirect from your external tool approves it and pays the participant. On a task without a redirect it waits for you instead | High-volume external surveys                 |
| **Self-report**   | The participant's own completion approves it and pays them, with no review from you                                                        | Steps where the participant's word is enough |

Review method is set per task, so one opportunity can mix them. In the task builder, **Expert approves** is self-report and **Needs approval** is manual review, except on an external-link task, where it is auto-approve. Manual review on an external link is set through the API; see [External Surveys & Redirect URLs](https://terac.com/docs/researchers/integrations/external-surveys).

## Manual Review Workflow [#manual-review-workflow]

1. **Open the submission**

   Navigate to the Submissions tab and open the **Work review** stage, then click a submission.

2. **Review the work**

   Examine the participant's submission:

   * Survey responses
   * Uploaded files
   * Interview recordings and transcripts

   Uploaded files are renamed after the task and the submission, for example `upload_your_files-<submission ID>.pdf`, so a file you save still says where it came from.

3. **Make a decision**

   Choose one of three actions:

   * **Approve** - the work meets your standards; the participant is paid
   * **Reject** - the work does not meet standards; optionally provide a reason
   * **Strike** - flag serious quality issues (repeated low effort, dishonesty)

## Screening Review [#screening-review]

If your opportunity routes applicants to you rather than auto-inviting them, screening responses land in a review queue. For each applicant you can:

* **Approve screening** - the participant advances to the task
* **Reject screening** - the participant is screened out

## AI-Assisted Screening Review [#ai-assisted-screening-review]

For screening, Terac can evaluate an applicant's interview responses against the screening policy attached to your research guide and return a recommendation of approve, needs review, or reject. Applicants the policy is confident about are resolved automatically; the rest are routed to a human. See [Research Guides](https://terac.com/docs/researchers/opportunities/research-guides).

This applies to screening decisions. Post-task work review follows the review method set on the opportunity.

## Auto-Review for External Tasks [#auto-review-for-external-tasks]

When your task runs on a third-party tool and you have configured [redirect URLs](https://terac.com/docs/researchers/integrations/external-surveys), submissions are reviewed automatically from the result your tool sends back:

* A `completed` callback **approves** the submission and triggers the payout.
* A `screened_out`, `quota_full`, or `rejected` callback closes the submission without charging you.

If redirect URLs are enabled but no callback arrives, the submission stays in **Work review** and is auto-rejected after 6 hours. This is why configuring the completion redirect matters: without it, qualified participants are rejected automatically.

## Participant Ratings [#participant-ratings]

After reviewing a submission, you can rate the participant on a quality scale. Ratings are visible in the participant's profile and influence their standing for future opportunities. High-quality participants are more likely to be recommended for your next opportunity.

## Kick Out [#kick-out]

If a participant is problematic (unresponsive, submitting spam), you can remove them from the opportunity with **Kick Out Participant**. This marks their submission as abandoned and frees the slot, and they can still be re-invited later.

On an opportunity paid per hour or per task, kicking out an expert who is in progress asks **Reject and offboard this expert?** instead. Their submission is rejected, they are offboarded and told so, and payouts already made aren't taken back.

## Reset Participation [#reset-participation]

In rare cases where a participant needs to restart (e.g., technical issues during a task), you can reset their participation. This returns their submission to the beginning of the task phase.

> **Warning**
>
> Resetting participation cannot be undone. Only use this when a genuine
> technical issue prevented the participant from completing their work fairly.

## What's Next? [#whats-next]

- [View Interviews](https://terac.com/docs/researchers/results/interviews): Review recordings and transcripts
- [Generate Insights](https://terac.com/docs/researchers/results/insights): Extract themes from completed research
- [Submissions](https://terac.com/docs/researchers/results/submissions): Track submission status