Manuscripts that are submitted are typically examined by two expert reviewer (or more). The recommendation of whether an article should be accepted, altered, or rejected will be sought from peer reviewers. Additionally, they must inform the editors of any instances of author misconduct, including plagiarism and unethical behaviour.
The peer review process used by SCIENXT journals is single-blind, with both authors and reviewers remaining anonymous.
The validity and coherence of research articles are largely evaluated by editors and peer reviewers before they are accepted for publication by SCIENXT Publishing. The readability of the writing may also be a question for the reviewers. Unless they fall outside the journal’s focus or the presentation or written English is of an unacceptable low standard, submitted publications will be distributed to peer-reviewers.
Points to be Consider
Reviewers are urged to submit thorough, constructive criticism that will aid the editors in deciding whether to publish the piece as well as suggestions for how the authors could strengthen their work. The question of whether the study has significant methodological problems that should prevent publication or whether more research or data are needed to validate the findings is crucial. Reviewers should offer references whenever feasible to back up their assertions.
Reviewers should address the issues and state whether any necessary revisions are “major revisions” or “minor revisions” in their opinion. Generally speaking, if more information is needed to support the claims or the interpretations are not supported by the data, if more research is needed that could alter the conclusions, or if the methods used are insufficient or contain statistical errors, revisions are likely to be “major revisions”.