JRRS LASU

Peer Review Policy

Our commitment to rigorous and impartial evaluation.

Our Peer Review Process

The Journal of Research and Review in Science (JRRS) is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and quality. A critical component of this commitment is our rigorous peer-review process. All manuscripts submitted to JRRS undergo a double-blind peer review, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed to ensure an unbiased and objective evaluation.

The Review Workflow

The peer-review process is managed by our editorial team and follows a structured workflow:

  1. Initial Manuscript Evaluation: Upon submission, the manuscript is first evaluated by the editorial office for its suitability, scope, and adherence to the journal's formatting guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet these initial criteria may be returned to the authors for revision before being sent out for full peer review.
  2. Assignment to an Editor: If the manuscript passes the initial evaluation, it is assigned to a member of the editorial board who has expertise in the relevant field. The editor is responsible for overseeing the peer-review process.
  3. Invitation to Reviewers: The editor selects and invites at least two independent expert reviewers in the field. Reviewers are chosen based on their expertise, publication history, and reputation for providing thorough and constructive feedback.
  4. Conducting the Review: Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, scientific soundness, methodology, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field. They provide a detailed report with their comments and recommendations.
  5. Editorial Decision: The editor considers the reviewers' reports and makes one of the following decisions:
    • Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted for publication without any changes.
    • Revisions Required: The manuscript is accepted pending minor or major revisions as suggested by the reviewers and editor.
    • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial changes and will need to undergo a second round of peer review after revision.
    • Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to significant flaws or a lack of novelty.
  6. Author Revision: If revisions are required, the corresponding author is notified and provided with the reviewers' comments (anonymously). Authors are given a specified timeframe to revise their manuscript and submit a revised version along with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments.
  7. Final Decision: The revised manuscript is re-evaluated by the editor, and in some cases, by the original reviewers, to ensure that all concerns have been adequately addressed. The editor then makes a final decision on the manuscript's publication.

Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. JRRS adheres to the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Reviewers are expected to disclose any potential conflicts of interest and to treat the manuscript with the utmost confidentiality.