The Peer Review System is usually used to decide whether a scientific article is published in a scientific journal, conference proceeding, or book with multiple authors. The decision is intended to serve two purposes, firstly a filter for dissemination of scientific content to improve the scientific progress readers have when reading articles, and secondly as an evaluation of the scientific quality of the author, measured typically mostly or solely on the quality, sometimes the quantity, of peer-reviewed publications. From a perspective of quantitative psychology, the peer review system is a measurement instrument to measure article or author quality and can be described by quality measures as all other measurement tools. In this presentation, we will consider some possible sets of assumptions how reviewing works, and present some results to estimate the quality of the review system as a measurement tool from simulated review processes. We will compare the measurement quality to the resource costs of applying the tool, and consider some possible alternative measurement tools.