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 good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards and all manuscripts are peer-reviewed following the procedure outlined below. 

Initial Manuscript Evaluation 

Our in-house editors first evaluate all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript with the highest scientific quality to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the journal's aims and scope. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts 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 bank is constantly updated. 

Referee Reports 

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

- Is it original?

- Is it methodologically sound?

- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines?

- Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions?

- Correctly references previous relevant work?

The evaluation will be submitted by the peer reviewer(s) through our online Review System.

How Long Does the Review Process Take? 

Generally, the peer review process in Science Insights 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. Should the referee’s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. 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 Editor, 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. The Editor’s decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript. 

Final Report 

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees and may include verbatim comments by the referees. 

Editor's Decision is Final 

Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Editor-in-Chief Decision Form