Peer Review Process

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of our scholarly publishing and is carried out by all our scientific journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining high standards and all manuscripts are peer-reviewed following the procedure outlined below. 


=====================================================

DETAILED REGULAR MANUSCRIPT EVALUATION PROCESS

=====================================================

  • Section Editor: For Insights Publisher, section editor refers to those who triage new submissions and assigned them to discipline-related in-house editors for initial assessment.
  • Triage: All new submissions will be triaged by section editor(s) for the suitability, integrity, language, and plagiarism.
  • Early Rejection: The low-quality manuscript(s) and those out of journal’s publication aim and scope will encounter direct rejection by the section editor(s) after triage. This happens for approximately 5% of submissions.
  • Initial Assessment: All manuscripts passed triage and 1st round plagiarism checking will be assigned to 2-3 in-house editors for assessment before being sent out for peer review. We value all peer reviewers’ work and only send out potential manuscripts being reviewed.
  • Early Acceptance: The real high-quality manuscript(s) will be accepted early after initial assessment by 2-3 in-house-editors in line with editor-in-chief (EIC)’s agreement. The acceptance notification will be sent out by the EIC. This happens only in 0.1% submissions overall.
  • Rejected after Initial Assessment: About 10% of manuscripts will be rejected by EIC after initial assessment based on the scientific essence, design, humanity, professional ethics, and inappropriate remarks such as anti-humanism and war advocacy.
  • Peer Review: Those, about 85% manuscripts, that reached ≥ 8/10 point-scale with initial assessment are normally passed on to at least 2 external scholars for review; sometimes, the number of peer reviewers can reach 5-7 expertise scholars.
    • Type of Peer Review: Our Peer Review Policy employs double-blind reviewing, where both the referee(s) and author(s) remain anonymous throughout the process. 
    • How the Referee is Selected: Whenever possible, referees match the paper according to their expertise, and Our Reviewer Bankis constantly updated. 
    • Referee Reports:

                      Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

                          - Is it original?

                          - Is it methodologically sound?

                          - Does it follow appropriate ethical guidelines?

                          - Has the study produced results that are clearly presented and support the conclusions?

                          - Does it correctly reference previous relevant work?

  • How Long Does the Review Process Take?Generally, the peer review process is two weeks. However, sometimes the review process needs longer than expected for many reasons. Therefore, the time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees.
  • Peer Review Comments Collection: Section editors are responsible for collecting the comments from referees and sending them to EIC for evaluation.
  • EIC Made a Decision: When the EIC received all review comments from the section editor, and a thorough evaluation will be given, and a decision will be made. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee’s report has thoroughly convinced the EIC, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee’s report.
  • Further Assessment Needed: If the referee’s reports contradict one another, or a report is unnecessarily delayed, further expert opinion will be sought.
  • Revision Needed: If the EIC determines that a revision is required, a revision request will be sent to the authors along with the referees' recommendations. If the authors decline to revise, the manuscript will be dismissed without further consideration. If the authors agree to revise, the revised manuscripts may be returned to the original referees, who may then demand another revision.
  • EIC’s Decision is Final: The EIC’s decision will be sent to the author with comments made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. A final decision to accept, reject, or revise the manuscript will be made only by the EIC of the journal. 
  • EIC Responsibilities: The journal EIC makes decisions and oversees the quality of publications. Without exception, EIC is the only decision maker for all submitted contents that is to be published.

 

=====================================================

SPECIAL THEMATIC MANUSCRIPT EVALUATION PROCESS

=====================================================

 

In order to prioritize a specific topic, Insights Publisher organizes thematic issues to achieve this objective.  A thematic issue is centered around a specific theme and receives special emphasis. Proposals for thematic issues can only be initiated by members of the editorial team of the journal. Once the proposal is accepted, Insights Publisher will extend an invitation to at least one expert who possesses knowledge of the topical area to serve as the guest editor. Insights Publisher does not accept external proposal without an invitation.

Insights Publisher treats all topics from various fields equally in order to uphold scientific equality. Insights Publisher does not exhibit any particular bias, especially when it comes to delicate subjects such as abortion, suicide, LGBTQ+, and wars, etc.

In order to provide deeper insight into specific topics, our journals have the distinctive feature of publishing thematic issues focusing on different the topics.

 

Who are Guest Editors?

For Insights Publisher, “guest editors” are invited experts designated as temporary editors who assume responsibility for a particular themed issue in a journal. They actively seek input from authors, oversee the peer-review process for the submissions, and work closely with the journal’s Editor-in-Chief (EIC) to ensure the issue runs smoothly and adheres to publication standard.

 

Key Roles of Guest Editors

Guest editors play an essential role in contributing to the timely publication of the thematic issue.

  • Author Solicitation: Upon the acceptance of the invitation, the guest editor initiates contact with pertinent researchers and experts to extend invitations for submissions.
  • Editorial Oversight: Guest editors evaluate manuscripts that have been submitted, guaranteeing that they are consistent with the theme of the issue and meet the quality standards.
  • Peer Review Management: Assign reviewers and make primary decisions based on their feedback to facilitate the peer review process.
  • Communication with EIC: Ensure that the issue is in compliance with the journal publication guidelines, resolve any concerns, and maintain consistent communication with the journal’s EIC to discuss progress. The ultimate determination of whether to “Reject” or “Accept” is made by the EIC of the journal.

 

Guidelines for Thematic Issues

Insights Publisher suggests the invited guest editors following the guidelines as shown below:

After accepting the invitation to serve as the guest editor, the subsequent task is to find and extend invitations by the guest editors to prospective authors to submit articles for the issue. This procedure may include contacting specialists in the subject, requesting contributions optionally through a public call for papers through the journal website or somewhere else, or extending invitations to authors of pertinent prior research to elaborate on their existing work.

Upon receiving entries, it is pivotal to meticulously evaluate and choose only the most exceptional submissions for the thematic edition. This encompasses peer review, editorial review, or a combination of both.

After selecting the articles, the subsequent task is to strategize the structure and organization of the thematic issue. This entails categorizing articles based on subtopics, arranging them in chronological or thematic order, or presenting them in an entirely other format.

Furthermore, it is critical to consider extra content that can augment the influence and pertinence of the thematic issue. This encompasses editorials, introductions, summaries, or other contextualizing material that furnishes background information, emphasizes salient discoveries, or provides further perspectives on the subject matter.

 

Is a Theme Proposal Needed?

As an invited guest editor, it is vital to thoroughly examine the submission criteria and editorial practices of the journal. A comprehensive grasp of the journal’s scope and purpose, together with any particular formatting criteria, is key. As the theme topics are solely determined by the journal editorial team, the invited guest editors are not required to create a proposal on the topic.

After acceptance of the invitation, the journal will allocate the objective and establish a submission portal for the thematic issue. Subsequently, the guest editor will initiate the invitation of contributors and supervise the submission and review process. Collaboration between authors, reviewers, and the journal’s EIC is necessary to ensure timely completion and adherence to the journal’s quality and integrity criteria for the special issue.

 

Authors Invitation and Authorship of Guest Editors

Invited guest editors are generally required to use the same criteria and principles as permanent editors when extending invitations to authors to contribute to a published journal. This entails verifying that all authors satisfy the submission requirements of the publication, including word count restrictions, formatting instructions, and proper citation of sources. Through their adherence to these criteria, guest editors contribute to the preservation of the uniformity and trustworthiness of the magazine, so guaranteeing that every published content adheres to the same stringent criteria.

In addition, guest editors must also validate that authors provide authentic and unpublished material. Maintaining academic integrity and avoiding plagiarism is of utmost importance. By ensuring the authenticity of all submissions and preventing their publication elsewhere, guest editors safeguard the reputation of the magazine and its contributors. Furthermore, this specification guarantees that readers can have confidence in the precision and dependability of the research that is published in the journal.

As well, guest editors have the essential responsibility of verifying that authors have acquired all required permissions or rights to publish their work. This encompasses acquiring authorization to replicate photos, tables, or other copyrighted content, as well as confirming that all writers have transparently disclosed any conflicts of interest. By mandating authors to comply with these criteria, guest editors safeguard both the journal and its contributors against possible legal complications or ethical breaches.

Submission to the peer review process of the journal is another crucial prerequisite for authors who have been invited by a guest editor. The primary responsibility of guest editors is to choose peer reviewers and supervise the peer review process for submissions. Through the implementation of a comprehensive and unbiased peer review process, guest editors contribute to the maintenance of the journal’s quality and repute. This criterion also serves to guarantee that all published work has undergone thorough evaluation by specialists in the respective subject.

Insights Publisher restricts our guest editors to being authors or co-authors in only one manuscript for the very thematic issue they managed. As well, guest editors are anticipated to compose the Introduction or Editorial for the thematic issue.

 

Post-submission Process/Peer Review

All new submissions for thematic issues will undergo the same peer review procedure as regular submissions shown in the flow chart above.

 

Editor-in-Chief Decision Form