![]() If an editor, reviewer, or author is in doubt on how to proceed during the peer-review process, the peer review team is the main point of contact for guidance, with two specialized sub-teams: research integrity and editorial review operations. They only endorse publication if the reviewers validate the contents of a manuscript.Ĭhief editors, handling editors, reviewers, and authors are guided and supported by our peer review team, which upholds and ensures high quality standards for manuscripts and the peer review itself, certifying the quality, scientific rigor, and validity of research articles and promoting collaboration among authors, reviewers, and editors. They evaluate the methodology of a study for solidity and rigor, and ensure the research provides valid conclusions and is supported by sufficient data.Įditors are subject experts and assess the peer-review process and manuscripts meticulously. Reviewers are subject experts and evaluate manuscripts by using the quality assessment tool and designated review questionnaire that prioritize scientific quality, rigor, and validity. They must comply with all editorial and ethical policies and take all reviewer and editor comments into consideration. What is expected of everyone involved?Īuthors must submit a manuscript that has significant scholarly value and falls within the scope of the journal. This model ensures rigorous peer review, rapid decisions, and the publication of high-quality research. Frontiers' in-house research integrity team performs pre- and post-review quality screens and can reject articles that do not meet acceptance criteria (listed below). Handling editors and reviewers can recommend rejection at any time editors make acceptance decisions and chief editors make acceptance and rejection decisions. Instead, we judge the value and validity of presented work through rigorous quality checks and empower our editorial boards to take charge of content decisions. We don't reject manuscripts based on their perceived potential impact, nor do we set a rejection rate – formal or informal. ![]() Manuscripts that pass these criteria are accepted, those that do not pass the criteria are rejected. Principles of peer reviewįrontiers upholds strict quality standards for manuscripts and the peer review process through clear criteria and dedicated teams. All review editors that volunteer through the platform are vetted by our associate editors, specialty chief editors, or field chief editors, to ensure the best possible peer review experience. Visit to find out more.įrontiers Discover also allows our editors to maintain control of the peer review process. Support their colleagues, and the community, by offering to review these submissionsĬontribute as a reviewer when it's convenient to them. Identify submissions that match their expertise That's why we built Frontiers Discover - a platform that enables Frontiers' review editors to:īrowse manuscripts that have been submitted to our journals And the way researchers are invited to review can be inefficient. We know researchers' time to contribute by engaging in peer review is limited. We continuously innovate to provide cutting-edge tools and services for an efficient peer review.Īll submissions, including those that are part of themed Research Topic article collections, undergo the same rigorous review process. To achieve this, we developed a unique, award-winning collaborative review forum that unites authors, reviewers, and the handling editor online and brings the highest quality service to all participants. Last, but not least, the process needs to be efficient. It should be rigorous, fair, constructive, accountable, and transparent for everyone involved. We believe peer review must be centered on objective criteria for the validity and quality of the work presented. Peer review is handled by active researchers, carefully appointed to our editorial boards according to strict excellence criteria, and who certify the validity of research with their names on the published article. Our collaborative peer review process maximizes quality while ensuring researchers' rights to submit their work for a rigorous, constructive, and transparent review. Reviewers and the handling editor acknowledged on all published articlesĪverage time from submission to final decision: 61 days Two phases: independent review and interactive, collaborative review ![]() Rigorous, constructive, efficient, and transparent ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |