Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy for The Science Brigade Publishers Journals

Introduction:

The Science Brigade Publishers is dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of peer review across all its scientific journals. Our double-blind peer review process is designed to ensure the fairness, objectivity, and confidentiality of the scholarly evaluation of manuscripts.

Double-Blind Peer Review Process:

1. Initial Manuscript Submission:

   • Authors are required to prepare manuscripts in a way that does not give away their identity to reviewers.
   • Submissions are initially assessed by the editorial team for their conformity with the journal's scope, adherence to the submission guidelines, and overall quality.

2. Reviewer Selection:

   • Manuscripts passing the initial assessment are assigned to at least two independent experts in the relevant field, chosen for their knowledge and reputation.
   • Reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities, just as the authors are unaware of the reviewers'.

3. Review Phase:

   • Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on originality, methodological rigour, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field.
   • They are required to provide constructive feedback and recommendations for the manuscript, including acceptance, revision, or rejection.

4. Author Anonymity:

   • Efforts are made to ensure that authors' identities are not disclosed to reviewers through the manuscript or the metadata attached to electronic files.
   • Authors should also ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in such a way that does not give away their identity.

5. Reviewer Anonymity:

   • Reviewers' identities are kept confidential from the authors at all times.
   • Reviewers are instructed not to attempt to discover the authors' identities.

6. Feedback to Authors:

   • Authors are provided with the reviewers' comments and are given the opportunity to revise their manuscript in light of the feedback received.
   • A revised manuscript should be accompanied by a detailed response to reviewers' comments.

7. Decision-Making:

   • The final decision on a manuscript is made by the journal's editorial board or editor-in-chief, taking into consideration the reviewers’ feedback.
   • The decision is communicated to the authors along with any reviewer comments.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

• Reviewers are expected to provide unbiased and constructive feedback promptly, adhering to the timeframes stipulated by the journal.
• Conflicts of interest must be declared and may disqualify an individual from reviewing a specific manuscript.

Ethical Considerations:

• Reviewers are required to treat all manuscripts as confidential documents, not to be disclosed or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• All parties involved in the peer review process must ensure the integrity of the process.

Post-Review:

• The Science Brigade Publishers encourages post-publication discussion and will facilitate this process as appropriate.
• Reviewers' contributions are acknowledged annually on the journal’s website (without revealing their identity in relation to specific manuscripts).

Continuous Improvement:

• The peer review process is subject to ongoing evaluation and will be updated to reflect best practices and the evolving needs of the scientific community.

 

---

Note: The Science Brigade Publishers is committed to fostering a fair, unbiased, and constructive peer review process that supports the advancement of science and the dissemination of high-quality research. This policy is integral to our mission and is applied to all journals within our purview.