Category: Review Criteria
No matter how well a researcher knows the material, rehearsals are important to ensure a smooth delivery of…
Filler words, those ums, ahs, and you knows that pepper so many speeches, can be more than dead…
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Peer Review can be a puzzling and many a times, frustrating process for researchers, even experienced ones. Peer review, which is expected to be an objective exercise, can never completely be free of subjectivity, due to its very nature. Further, the intricacies involved may make it difficult to comprehend various aspects of the process. The attached presentation highlights some of the criteria used for evaluating scientific manuscripts.