Category: Review Criteria

Page 1/2

peer editor

The Peer Editor is Wrong. Now What?

You open the email from the editor of the journal you submitted your article to, what now seems…
Continue Reading

Most Common Mistakes Leading To Journal Rejection

You’re about to send your first journal article. You’ve done your research well, and are pretty confident that the research…
Continue Reading

How to Get the Most Out of a Presentation Rehearsal?

No matter how well a researcher knows the material, rehearsals are important to ensure a smooth delivery of…
Continue Reading

How to Cut Out Filler Words During Your Presentation?

Filler words, those ums, ahs, and you knows that pepper so many speeches, can be more than dead…
Continue Reading

Scooped! It’s Not the End of the World, or the Paper

It’s every professor’s nightmare. At the end of a project, he and his graduate student write up the…
Continue Reading

New approaches to peer review

The conventional approach to peer review involves evaluation of an article by one or more among a panel of recognized experts in the field who are nominated by the editorial board of the journal. Alternative strategies are being explored to improve on the existing processes. Some of the new approaches to peer review, which are geared towards improving traditional methods, are described.

Rejection without Peer Review: Issues and Solutions

A fact that is not very widely known or universally accepted by authors is that manuscripts may be rejected without the due and expected peer review process. While manuscripts have to go through the peer review process in order to be published, they can be rejected without peer review. For high-impact, general science journals, the majority of submitted papers may be rejected in this manner.

Rejection of Scientific Papers – Part II

In evaluating a manuscript submitted for publication in a journal, a peer reviewer takes into account many factors. The primary considerations related to quality, originality and presentation are listed in the attached presentation. Based on these, suggestions are outlined, which would minimize the possibility of rejection.

Strategies to Navigate the Peer-Review Process

Once peer reviewers respond with comments on an article submitted to a research journal, authors have to determine the most appropriate way of responding to their comments and recommendations, in order to ensure acceptance and eventual publication of the article. An outline of the strategies which may be adopted are described in the attached presentation.

Peer-Review Process: Referee Report

From the moment you submit your paper to a journal until you receive the referee report may be a period filled with apprehension and/or expectation. The report of the peer reviewer goes a long way in deciding the publication prospects, and therefore the eventual impact of your work. The presentation below summarizes the typical considerations in putting together a referee report, based on the evaluation criteria used by the peer reviewer.

Disclaimer : The opinions expressed here by the Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs' alone, and do not reflect the opinions of Crimson Interactive or any employee thereof. Crimson Interactive is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the Bloggers. While every caution has been taken to provide readers with the most accurate information and honest analysis, please use your discretion before taking any decisions based on the information in this blog. Author will not compensate you in any way whatsoever if you ever happen to suffer a loss/inconvenience/damage because of/while making use of information in this blog.

Copyright © 2016 Paper Publishing & Academic Writing Tips for Scientific Researchers | All Rights Reserved.