Peer review processes

The process of publishing an article typically takes approximately 3-6 months from the submission to the journal until its publication. Below are the detailed steps of this process. Each step encompasses the time from the submission to the journal until the publication.

Initial Evaluation by the Editor: (1-2 weeks)

  • Upon receiving the manuscript, the editors conduct an initial evaluation. This evaluation aims to determine whether the manuscript aligns with the scope and acceptability criteria of the journal.
  • The editor examines the content of the manuscript, the significance of the research conducted, the accuracy of the methods used, and the consistency of the results. If deemed appropriate, the manuscript proceeds to the next stage; otherwise, authors are provided with feedback for revisions or the manuscript may be rejected.

Selection of Reviewers: (1 week)

  • If the manuscript is deemed suitable, the editors select appropriate reviewers. These reviewers are individuals who are experts in relevant fields, capable of providing unbiased and objective evaluations.
  • The selection of reviewers is based on factors such as the complexity of the manuscript, its field, and methodology.

Peer Review Process: (4-6 weeks)

  • The manuscript is sent to selected reviewers, initiating the peer review process. Reviewers meticulously examine the manuscript, focusing on crucial aspects such as content, methodology, results, and discussion.
  • Reviewers provide evaluations indicating whether the manuscript is suitable for publication, requires revisions, or should be rejected. These evaluations are based on criteria such as the quality, novelty, and scientific contribution of the manuscript.
  • If two reviewers recommend publication without major revisions, the editor may accept the manuscript.
  • If both reviewers recommend rejection, the editor usually decides to reject the manuscript.
  • If one or both reviewers recommend revisions, but there is disagreement regarding the scope or nature of the revisions, a third reviewer may be consulted.
  • The third reviewer evaluates whether revisions are necessary and whether the proposed revisions are sufficient.
  • Additionally, if there are conflicting opinions between two reviewers after revisions, a third reviewer may facilitate resolution and final decision-making.

Compilation of Review Results: (1-2 weeks)

  • After receiving evaluations from reviewers, the editor compiles and evaluates the results.
  • Reviewers' assessments are reviewed and considered by the editor.

Notification to Authors and Revision Process: (2-4 weeks)

  • Authors receive feedback from reviewers along with any necessary revisions.
  • Authors revise their manuscripts according to reviewers' suggestions and criticisms. Revised manuscripts are resubmitted to the editor.

Final Evaluation and Decision Process: (1-2 weeks)

  • The editor conducts a final evaluation by reviewing the authors' revisions.
  • If the manuscript is deemed acceptable after revisions, it is considered suitable for publication.
  • Manuscripts deemed unsuitable for publication are rejected by the editor.

These processes encompass the fundamental steps of the peer review process. Depending on the journal's policies and requirements, additional steps or variations may occur. This process aims to meticulously evaluate manuscripts to ensure the quality and reliability of the journal and determine their publishability.