Our Peer Review Policy
All submitted manuscripts are subject to a review to ensure that they comply with the scientific and ethical requirements. Each submitted manuscript undergoes a plagiarism check and enters a peer-review process afterward. Referees for monographs are external collaborators who agreed to contribute their own expertise in reviewing the submitted manuscript, independently and on a voluntary basis.
Book chapter manuscripts are submitted to IntechOpen as contributions to Edited Volumes. All chapters undergo a main Editor peer-review. Academic Editors' chapters undergo external blind peer-review – the result is a fully peer-reviewed book. Book chapters go through a two-step review process:
1. CHAPTER PROPOSAL - Prospective authors are required to submit a chapter proposal. Chapter proposals consist of: a tentative title, keywords, short topic description of the proposed chapter (100 - 150 words), and the names of all contributing authors. Academic Editors are leading international experts in their fields and have an overall responsibility for the scientific content of the publication. The Academic Editor reviews all chapter proposals, decides which topics to focus on, suggests improvements and selects potential manuscripts with a high degree of relevance and bearing on developments within the field. Academic Editors have the overall responsibility for the content of the publication. Chapters that do not fall within the Scope and Topics of the book, are scientifically not sound, are incomplete, or of marginal interest to the field are rejected.
2. FULL CHAPTER - A full chapter consists of: a manuscript title, Author name(s) and affiliation(s), abstract, keywords, introduction, main body with numbered headings (at least one heading is required) and references. Authors may also provide acknowledgements, appendices, and nomenclatures but this is not mandatory. Full chapters are intended to allow authors to represent their current research findings in a longer format than traditional journal articles offering the possibility of a more comprehensive analysis. Once submitted, the Academic Editor(s) reviews the full chapters by screening them for plagiarism, evaluating their scientific merit, and ultimately decides whether they are suitable for inclusion in the book or not. Authors receive their peer-review results 30 days from the date of their full chapter submission.
During the review process the Academic Editor(s) suggest rounds of revision and authors work on improving their chapters. The Academic Editor(s) has/have the absolute possibility of accepting, requesting major or minor revisions or rejecting the full chapter submissions.
Authors may file an appeal if they suspect that their manuscript was improperly reviewed. Appeals should be addressed to your dedicated Author Service Manager or to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Policy last updated: 2017-09-13