Peer Review Process at IntechOpen Explained
Peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field, before a paper describing this work is published. Peer review helps the publisher decide whether the submitted work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or is rejected. For a flowchart description of the peer review process at IntechOpen please see below.
IntechOpen is dedicated to publishing high-quality content and we are a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), all referees and Editors are instructed to review submissions in line with the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer reviewers.
There is a wealth of further information regarding peer review available and we would encourage our editors, authors, and reviewers to educate themselves further regarding this process. A clearer understanding of the peer review process can only lead to greater transparency in the benefits that peer review affords, maintain high standards of peer review, and also allows reviewers and authors to participate in the peer review process. For more information on the peer review process we recommend the following:
Peer-Review: The Nuts and Bolts by Sense About Science (SAS)
At IntechOpen, the book concept is generally first developed by an Internal Handling Editor, a member of IntechOpen staff, who will search for a recognised expert in the field to act as an External Editor. Once an External Editor has been appointed by the Internal Handling Editor, the book is open for submissions. Prior to submitting a full chapter, authors are first asked to submit a chapter proposal in the form of an abstract which is then assessed by the External Editor for its suitability in terms of the overall scope and direction of the book. At this point the submitted abstract will be either rejected or deemed suitable for inclusion by the External Editor. If an abstract is deemed suitable, the authors are invited by the Internal Handling Editor to submit a fully drafted manuscript, which will then be automatically subject to a plagiarism check via Ithenticate prior to being passed to the External Editor who coordinates the peer review. Once the review has been completed, the External Editor passes on all peer review reports and communicates their recommendation to the Internal Handling Editor, who then informs the authors of their decision. Recommendations are typically accept, revision required (major or minor), or reject.
The independently appointed External Editor manages the peer review and decision-making process. The Internal Handling Editor has a more hands-on role in the workflow and is responsible for author acquisition. As a result, author acquisition and manuscript review are completely independent. This distinction between Internal Handling Editor and External Editor roles (summarized below) ensures a fully robust and objective peer review process.
|Concept:||The Internal Handling Editor develops the general concept of the book and seeks out an External Editor who is a leading expert in the field.|
|Scope and Keywords:||These are defined by the External Editor who is appointed by the Internal Handling Editor.|
|Author Acquisition:||All contributing authors are independently acquired by the Internal Handling Editor.|
|Manuscript Receipt:||Once submitted, the manuscript is received by the Internal Handling Editor who submits the manuscript to a plagiarism check via Ithenticate.|
|Manuscript Review:||The peer review process of the manuscript is organised by the External Editor. Should the External Editor wish to contribute a chapter, the peer review process for their chapter is arranged by the Internal Handling Editor. This removes any conflict of interest.|
|Contents Listing:||The contents listing is decided by the External Editor.|
|Final Title & Preface:||Both the final title and preface are decided upon by the External Editor once all manuscripts have been subject to peer review and accepted.|
Monographs are subject to peer review to ensure that they comply with accepted scientific and ethical requirements. Each monograph is submitted to a plagiarism check by the Internal Handling Editor, prior to peer review. The Internal Handling Editor selects independent reviewers for monographs who volunteer their time and expertise. Please note that the Open Access Publication Fee is payable only after the manuscript has been accepted by the Internal Handling Editor following peer review.
Book chapter manuscripts are submitted as contributions to edited volumes. All chapters undergo peer review which is organized by the External Editor. Should the External Editor wish to contribute a chapter, the peer review process for their chapter is arranged by the Internal Handling Editor. This removes any conflict of interest. Once all chapters selected for inclusion have been approved for publication by the Internal Handling Editor, the book is ready for production, and then publication. Please note that the Open Access Publication fee is payable only after the manuscript has been accepted following peer review.
1. Chapter Proposal - Prospective authors are required to submit a chapter proposal. Chapter proposals should contain: a tentative title, keywords; short topic description of the proposed chapter (100 - 150 words), and the names of all contributing authors and their corresponding affiliations. External Editors who are experts in their field have overall responsibility for the scientific content of the publication. The External Editor assesses all chapter proposals, selects topics for inclusion, decides on the focus, suggests improvements based on developments within the field. Chapters that do not fall within the scope and topics of the book, are scientifically unsound or are incomplete are rejected.
2. Full Chapter - A full chapter consists of: a 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; however, this is not mandatory. Full chapters allow authors to present their current research findings in a longer format than traditional journal articles with more comprehensive analysis. Once submitted, the editor(s) review the full chapters by screening them for plagiarism, evaluating scientific merit, and decides whether they are suitable for inclusion in the book. Authors typically receive their peer review results within 30 days of the submission date.
During the review process the External Editor(s) is responsible for making recommendations regarding acceptance, requesting revisions, or rejecting.
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.