Every research article published on jrnls.org has been peer reviewed. The process below is common to all our journals; each journal's editors manage the review of the manuscripts submitted to it.
From submission to publication
- Submission: Authors submit through the journal's online submission system, found from Author Guidelines.
- Editorial check: The editorial office checks the manuscript for scope, completeness, format and similarity to published work.
- Editor's assessment: An editor decides whether the manuscript is suitable for review. Manuscripts outside the journal's scope or with serious flaws are declined at this stage, usually within a few days.
- Peer review: Suitable manuscripts are sent to at least two independent experts in the field. Our journals use double-blind review: reviewers do not know who the authors are, and authors do not know who reviewed their work. Reviewers are normally given 21 days, and the editors send reminders as the due date approaches.
- Decision: Using the reviewers' reports, the handling editor decides to accept, ask for minor or major revision, or reject, and writes to the corresponding author with the reports.
- Revision: Authors revise the manuscript and send a point-by-point response to every comment. Revised manuscripts may go back to the same reviewers, and the cycle repeats until the editors are satisfied.
- Acceptance and production: Accepted articles are copy-edited and typeset, and page proofs are sent to the corresponding author, who should return corrections promptly.
- Publication: Articles are published online as soon as the proofs are approved, then included in a journal issue.
Suggesting reviewers
Authors may suggest two or three qualified reviewers who are not at their own institutions and have no conflict of interest. The editors are free to choose other reviewers.
For reviewers
- Accept an invitation only if you have the expertise and can finish the review in time; tell the editor at once about any conflict of interest.
- Keep the manuscript and your review confidential, and do not use anything in it for your own work.
- Be objective and constructive: explain and support your recommendations, and avoid personal criticism.
- Point out relevant work the authors have not cited, and tell the editor about any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication or ethical concern.
Communication
All communication about a manuscript takes place by email and through the journal's submission system. Authors who disagree with a decision may appeal as described under Journal Policies.