Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Research Floor is committed to a transparent, fair, and rigorous peer review process that maintains the quality and integrity of the scientific record. This page outlines the steps involved in the peer review process from submission to publication.

1. Initial Submission & Quality Check

When a manuscript is submitted, it undergoes an initial quality check by the editorial office:

• Formatting check: Is the manuscript properly formatted according to the journal's guidelines?
• Plagiarism screening: The manuscript is checked for originality using iThenticate or similar software.
• Ethical compliance: Is there evidence of ethical approval (if applicable)?
• Scope check: Does the manuscript fit within the journal's scope?

Manuscripts that pass this initial check proceed to the editorial review stage. Those that fail are returned to the authors with feedback.

2. Editorial Assessment

The assigned Editor-in-Chief or Section Editor performs an initial assessment of the manuscript:

• Scientific significance: Does the research make a meaningful contribution to the field?
• Methodological rigor: Are the methods appropriate and well-described?
• Novelty: Does the manuscript present new and original findings?
• Decision: The editor may reject the manuscript outright or send it for peer review.

3. Reviewer Selection

If the manuscript is sent for peer review, the editor selects appropriate reviewers:

• Expertise: Reviewers are selected based on their subject matter expertise.
• Reviewer database: The editor uses the journal's reviewer database and may suggest additional reviewers.
• Conflict of interest check: Reviewers are screened for potential conflicts.
• Number of reviewers: Typically, 2–3 reviewers are assigned to each manuscript.

4. The Review Process

Reviewers are invited to evaluate the manuscript and provide feedback:

• Review invitation: Reviewers receive an invitation with a link to access the manuscript.
• Acceptance: Reviewers who accept the invitation commit to completing the review within the specified timeframe (usually 2–3 weeks).
• Review submission: Reviewers submit their feedback through the online system, including a recommendation (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject).
• Reminder system: Automatic reminders are sent to reviewers who have not yet submitted their reviews.

5. Editorial Decision

Once all reviews are received, the editor makes a decision based on the reviewers' feedback:

• Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without further revision (rare).
• Minor Revision: The manuscript requires minor changes and will be re-evaluated by the editor or a reviewer.
• Major Revision: The manuscript requires significant changes and will be re-reviewed.
• Reject: The manuscript is rejected for publication, with feedback provided to the authors.

6. Revisions & Resubmission

If revisions are requested:

• Authors: Prepare a detailed response to reviewers, addressing all comments.
• Revised manuscript: Submit the revised manuscript with changes highlighted.
• Re-evaluation: The revised manuscript is re-evaluated by the editor and may be sent back to reviewers.
• Final decision: If the revisions are satisfactory, the manuscript is accepted.

7. Acceptance & Publication

Once accepted:

• Copyediting: The manuscript is copyedited for grammar, style, and consistency.
• Typesetting: The manuscript is formatted for publication.
• Proof review: Authors receive a proof for final approval.
• Publication: The final version is published online with a DOI and made openly accessible.

8. Appeals & Complaints

Research Floor handles appeals and complaints fairly and transparently:

• Appeals: Authors may appeal an editorial decision by providing a detailed justification.
• Complaints: Concerns about the review process should be submitted to the editorial office.
• Investigation: All appeals and complaints are investigated promptly by the editorial team.

For questions about the peer review process, please contact reviewers@researchfloor.com.