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 catalog (topics) was first developed by IntechOpen's Senior Content Specialists - STM (Internal staff). Afterward, Commissioning Editors (Internal staff) contact recognized experts in their respective fields and invite them to become Academic Editors (External Editors) for each planned book. Once the Academic Editor (External Editor) has been appointed after being carefully selected by the Commissioning Editor (Internal staff) and the concept for the book is finalized (scope, topics, TOC), the book is open for submissions. Book chapter manuscripts are submitted as contributions to edited volumes. At this stage the manuscript submission and processing is supported by a Manuscript tracking system and the publishing process is managed by Author Service Managers (Internal Handling Editor), whose responsibilities include monitoring and facilitating all publishing activities for Authors, Academic Editors, co-editors, reviewers, production specialists. From submission to peer review, production, copyediting, and until final publication, Author Service Managers (Internal Handling Editors) ensure a simple and efficient publishing process. Author Service Managers (Internal Handling Editors) do not interfere with Academic Editors' (External Editors') decision-making processes. Book chapter manuscripts go through a two-step review process: chapter proposal review and full chapter review. Prior to submitting a full chapter, Prospective Authors are first asked to submit a chapter proposal in the form of an abstract which is then assessed by the Academic Editor (External Editor) for its suitability in terms of the overall scope and direction of the book. Chapter proposals should contain a tentative title, keywords, a short topic description of the proposed chapter (100 - 150 words), and the names of all contributing authors and their corresponding affiliations. At this point, the submitted chapter proposal will be either rejected (not scientifically sound or out of scope) or deemed suitable for inclusion by the Academic Editor (External Editor). If a chapter proposal is deemed suitable by the Academic Editor (External Editor), the Authors are informed by the Author Service Managers (Internal Handling Editor) to submit a fully drafted manuscript. The full chapter manuscript is then automatically subject to a plagiarism check via Ithenticate prior to being passed to the Academic Editor (External Editor) who performs the peer review. Once the peer review has been completed, the Academic Editor (External Editor) communicates (via Manuscript Tracking System) their decision to the Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor), who then informs the Authors of their decision. Should the Academic Editor (External Editor) wish to contribute a chapter, the peer review process for their chapter is arranged by the Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor). Academic Editors' chapters undergo external double-blind peer-review – the result is a fully peer-reviewed book.
Review outcomes are typically accepted, revision required (major or minor), or rejected. During the review process, the Academic Editor(s) (External Editor) suggest rounds of revision and authors work on improving their chapters. Resubmitted manuscripts are automatically subject to a plagiarism check via Ithenticate prior to being passed to the Academic Editor (External Editor). 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. Authors typically receive their peer review results within 30 days of the submission date.
Once a chapter is accepted for publication, the work is published individually via Online First, after review, and before the entire book is ready for publication. Once all chapters selected for inclusion in the book have been approved for publication, the book is ready for production, and then publication. Please note that the Open Access Publication fee is payable only after the full chapter manuscript has been accepted following peer review.
The independently appointed Academic Editor (External Editor) manages the peer review and decision-making process. The Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor) has a more hands-on role in the workflow and is responsible for the coordination of the publishing process. IntechOpen's Author Acquisition Managers, supported by Senior Content Specialists - STM (Internal staff), following the concept development of the book carried on by the Academic Editor (External Editor), are in charge of author acquisition. As a result, author acquisition and manuscript review are completely independent and unassociated. This distinction between Internal staff/Internal Handling Editor and External Editor roles (summarised below) ensures a fully robust and objective peer review process.
|IntechOpen's Senior Content Specialists - STM (Internal staff) defines the general topic of the book.
|Academic Editor appointment:
|Commissioning Editors (Internal staff) seek out an External Editor who is a leading expert in the field related to the topic of the book to be appointed as Academic Editor of the book, oftentimes joined by co-editors.
|Concept, Scope, and Keywords:
|These are defined by the Academic Editor (External Editor) who develops the final scope, topics, and the TOC of the book - the concept before the book starts accepting submissions.
|All contributing authors are independently acquired by Author Acquisition Managers (Internal staff), supported by Senior Content Specialists - STM (Internal staff). Based on the concept development of the book carried on by the Academic Editor (External Editor) and based on relevant keywords, scope, and topics, they carry out the identification of the most suitable and well-selected authors for the book.
|Once submitted, the chapter proposal and, in case of acceptance, the full chapter manuscript is received and the manuscript undergoes a plagiarism check via Ithenticate - all performed supported by a Manuscript Tracking System, overseen by the Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor). Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor) doesn't bear any responsibility in regards to editor and author acquisition, or development of the book concept.
|The peer review process of the full chapter manuscript is performed by the Academic Editor (External Editor). Should the Academic Editor (External Editor) wish to contribute a chapter, the external peer review process for their chapter is arranged by the Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor). This removes any conflict of interest.
|The contents listing is decided by the Academic Editor (External Editor).
|Final Title & Preface:
|Both the final title and preface are decided upon by the Academic Editor (External Editor) once all manuscripts have been subject to peer review and accepted.
Monographs (long form and short form Compacts) are subject to blind peer review to ensure that they comply with accepted scientific and ethical requirements. There is a two-steps process: each proposal, and if accepted, each monograph is submitted to a plagiarism check by the Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor), prior to peer review. The Author Service Manager (Internal Handling Editor) selects independent external reviewers for monographs who volunteer their time and expertise to review the proposal and the final manuscript under a blind peer review. 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.
To ensure that Conference proceedings published with IntechOpen contain the highest caliber of work possible, editors are required to adopt a thorough peer review process. Conference organizers and editors are to choose reviewers who are qualified experts within their fields and conduct all reviews according to standard requirements of an ethical review process. All submitted conference proceedings papers will be checked in iThenticate for plagiarism. The publisher also reviews all the submitted review reports. Only after this is completed does the manuscript enter the production phase.
All manuscripts submitted to our journals undergo single-blind peer review (independent of paper types). The peer review process is organized in such a way that all submitted papers undergo initial editorial office checks and Section Editors scope and relevance checks after which they are forwarded to Editorial Board Members for review coordination. They will collect external peer review reports, request author revisions (peer-review again whenever necessary), before making the final decision on publication or rejection. More information can be found here:
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 email@example.com.