Stages of reviewing
Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2024 5:17 am
biasedly.
Double-blind. Both the reviewer and the author do not know each other's names. This method eliminates bias on the part of the reviewer and pressure on the part of the author. The authority of the scientist (or his bad reputation) will not be an obstacle to an honest assessment of the material.
Open. Both the author and the reviewer know each other. philippine whatsapp number This is also a fairly common practice. This approach will protect the author of the study from plagiarism. On the other hand, the human factor comes into play: the reviewer can soften the assessment, refusing harsh criticism where it is necessary.
Transparent. In this case, the entire history of scientific review is available to readers. They will be able to see the editors' report, the authors' responses. The reader will have to spend more time studying the material, but in the end, he will have access to a more complete assessment of the article.
Collaborative. The reviewers are a group of scientists who work with the author of the article to improve it.
Now let's take a schematic look at the process of reviewing a scientific text. At each of the stages described below, if the article does not meet the requirements, it will be returned to the author for revision:
First, the article is checked for basic requirements (uniqueness, design).
If everything is in order, the publication selects a reviewer, and he begins checking.
The reviewer then works in tandem with the editor-in-chief. They compile a list of corrections and send the article to the author for correction of minor flaws (e.g., style of presentation, grammar).
After revision, a secondary review is carried out in collaboration with the editor-in-chief.
If the article passes all these filters, it will be accepted for publication and included in the next issue.
Reviewing articles in APNI
The scientific journal APNI has a deferred review system. How does it work?
The author sends the article through the form on the website .
A specially trained algorithm checks its uniqueness and compliance with formal criteria.
If everything is OK, the article is published on the site, and a reviewer is selected for it. At this stage, a publication certificate is issued.
Double-blind. Both the reviewer and the author do not know each other's names. This method eliminates bias on the part of the reviewer and pressure on the part of the author. The authority of the scientist (or his bad reputation) will not be an obstacle to an honest assessment of the material.
Open. Both the author and the reviewer know each other. philippine whatsapp number This is also a fairly common practice. This approach will protect the author of the study from plagiarism. On the other hand, the human factor comes into play: the reviewer can soften the assessment, refusing harsh criticism where it is necessary.
Transparent. In this case, the entire history of scientific review is available to readers. They will be able to see the editors' report, the authors' responses. The reader will have to spend more time studying the material, but in the end, he will have access to a more complete assessment of the article.
Collaborative. The reviewers are a group of scientists who work with the author of the article to improve it.
Now let's take a schematic look at the process of reviewing a scientific text. At each of the stages described below, if the article does not meet the requirements, it will be returned to the author for revision:
First, the article is checked for basic requirements (uniqueness, design).
If everything is in order, the publication selects a reviewer, and he begins checking.
The reviewer then works in tandem with the editor-in-chief. They compile a list of corrections and send the article to the author for correction of minor flaws (e.g., style of presentation, grammar).
After revision, a secondary review is carried out in collaboration with the editor-in-chief.
If the article passes all these filters, it will be accepted for publication and included in the next issue.
Reviewing articles in APNI
The scientific journal APNI has a deferred review system. How does it work?
The author sends the article through the form on the website .
A specially trained algorithm checks its uniqueness and compliance with formal criteria.
If everything is OK, the article is published on the site, and a reviewer is selected for it. At this stage, a publication certificate is issued.