Peer review
Peer review
Peer review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent researchers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in their journal.
All contributions will be initially assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to an appropriate number of expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper. The system automatically converts source files to a single PDF file of the manuscript, which is used in the peer-review process. The Editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
Not only is peer review a quality control form for academic journals, but it is also a very useful source of feedback for you. The feedback can be used to improve your paper before it is published. Thus, peer review is a collaborative process, where you as author engage in a dialogue with peers in your field, and receive constructive support to advance your work.
PoEM follows a double-blind peer review process in which the authors' and reviewers' identities are concealed from each other.
The peer review process
PoEM peer review process is summarized into the following steps. During the whole process, you can use PoEM’s online system to track the progress of your paper through peer review.
- Submission of Paper
The corresponding author submits the manuscript and a cover letter to our journal via our online system.
- Managing Editor assessment
The Managing Editor checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections, stylizations and recommendations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point.
- Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC)
The EIC checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. Also an Editor assesses correspondence of the manuscript to journal's scope, as well as its compliance with the requirements of the journal. Manuscripts that don’t match these criteria, as well as scientifically poor manuscripts, may be rejected without being reviewed any further. A manuscript that is rejected at this phase is not subject to further consideration, and the author cannot re-submit it for consideration.
- Invitation to Reviewers
The Managing Editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained – commonly this is 2, or more if needed. The choice of peer-reviewers is based on their expertise, reputation, and previous experience.
- Response to Invitations
Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. When declining, they might suggest alternative reviewers. At this stage the author should be informed that the manuscript has been sent for double blind peer review.
- Review is Conducted
The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point Referee report. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.
- Journal Evaluates the Reviews
The Managing editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.
- The Decision is Communicated
The Managing Editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments anonymously. If a revision is required, the Managing Editor should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. When the author fails to send the amended version of the manuscript by its deadline, the manuscript will be considered as rejected. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the Managing Editor. After author’s revision, the revised manuscript passes the second review by the Managing Editor and the reviewer.
At this stage, if there are any review comments which you don’t understand or don’t know how to respond to, please get in touch with our Managing Editor. However, if there’s a review comment that you don’t agree with, you are entitled to defend your position with objective and persuasive arguments included with your resubmission. The Managing Editor will consider that when the amended article is sent back to the reviewers.
If your paper is rejected, do not to let the experience knock you back! This happens to almost all researchers at some point in their career. Instead, try to use it as a valuable learning opportunity.
- Post review
At this last stage the Managing Editor provides the Editor-in-chief with the information about the reviewing process and sends recommendations, concerning manuscript's publication. The final decision is taken by the latter. If accepted, the paper is sent to production. In case of acceptance or rejection, the author will be notified. If the manuscript is sent back for either major or minor revision, the previous step will be followed. To note that authors can appeal against editorial decision, providing their own arguments and explanations.
Note: When a PoEM’s staff is the author, the same process will be followed with the exclusion of the concerned staff from it, the author will have no role in the review or decision.
