Peer review is generally categorized basing on the type of activity, field in which it has been submitted. Once the manuscript is submitted to the journal, the editor of the journal would assign the manuscript to an expert in the field. Usually 4-5 reviewers are consulted for this purpose and based on the reviewer workload and interest, a reviewer may accept or reject the invitation. Once manuscript is assigned to a reviewer, the reviewer would be giving their evaluation to the editor indicating all the strong points, weakness and suggestions if possible. This reviewers comments can be viewed by author for their knowledge on manuscript quality. Since the editors possess are appointed on the basis of their contribution to the field, they select the best persons to enrich the manuscript.
In peer review referee evaluation normally includes recommendation to strengthen the manuscript according to the latest developments as the reviewer would be an expert in the field concerned followed by the editor views.
Basically recommendations fall under the following categories.
1. Strongly recommended
2. Accept it without any changes
3. Accept it with minor changes,
4. Major revision,
5. Minor changes,
The final decision would be with the editor of the journal that uses discretion, based on the reviewers comments. Normally editors would go as the reviewers suggest and the identity of the reviewers would be kept secret from author as we follow single-blind peer review process. Not being aware of the identity will help editors to take a decision as editor decision will be final, no consensus between the reviews and editor is required, and decision will be made basing on the editors choice and possibility of arguments can be avoided. After the final approval from the editor the accepted manuscripts will be published after the galley-proof corrections in the respective journals.
Last date updated on May, 2014