Our site uses cookies to offer you a better user experience. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. To find out more, read our Privacy and Cookies policies.
  • Peer Review Policy

    Peer Review Model

    All Open Exploration journals adopt a single-blind peer review model which means that reviewers’ identities are kept concealed from authors, but authors identities are known to reviewers. All accepted articles (except for some Editorials released by the Editors) have undergone a rigorous and thorough review process to evaluate their novelty, scientificity, academic integrity, etc.

    Peer Review Process

    Each submission is subject to an initial check operated by the managing editor and the Academic Editor. The managing editor reviews the manuscript in terms of the suitability of the scope, format integrity, and scientific integrity. And the qualified paper is further assessed by the Academic Editor (usually the Editor-in-Chief, and sometimes the Editor-in-Chief assigns another Editorial Board member or a Guest Editor as the Academic Editor for certain papers) who has no conflicts of interest with the authors or the manuscript. The Academic Editor will decide whether the manuscript is sent for peer review. 

    After the initial check, peer reviewers, who focus on the same or similar research with the manuscript, are invited to evaluate the manuscript’s quality from the aspects of significance, novelty, integrity, presentation, scientific soundness, etc. The peer review usually needs at least two professional review reports which are comprised of detailed comments and an overall recommendation (“Accept”, “Minor Revision”, “Major Revision” or “Reject”). The review reports will be submitted to the Academic Editor for publication decision.

    Peer Reviewers

    Suitable reviewers are selected based on the following points.

    ★ They are independent of all the authors and their institutions.

    ★ They focus on the same or similar research with the manuscript, and they are able to impartially assess the manuscript based on originality, validity, and significance.

    ★ They have current publications in the same research areas with the manuscript.

    ★ They are able to complete peer review within the required time.

    Authors may suggest potential reviewers, however, the managing editors have the discretion to consider these suggested reviewers or not.

    Notes for Peer Reviewers

    Reviewers should declare their conflicts of interest before starting the review. If conflicts of interest exist, reviewers may withdraw from the review. 

    A manuscript under review should not be revealed to anyone other than peer reviewers and editorial staff. Peer reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript they review and must not divulge any information about the manuscript to any third party without prior permission from the journal editors.

    Reviewers should not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of the manuscript after submitting their reviews.

    More information about peer review, please refer to Peer Review and Peer Review Guidelines of individual journals.