Review Policy

  1. Submission completed by author(s)
    1. Once the submission has been received by JORS, it will be reviewed by a managing or section editor to ensure it complies with the journal specific aims.
  1. Initial evaluation by chief or associate editor
    1. The assigned editor determines whether the submission meets the author guidelines and JORS standards for review.
    2. If found acceptable, the editor then advances the submission to the peer-review stage.
  1. Submission for review
    1. The assigned editor reviews the article themselves in addition to forwarding it to a minimum of two peer reviewers.
    2. Peer reviewers will be selected based on subject matter expertise and availability.
    3. Each submission is subject to a double-blind review at this stage.
    4. Reviewers are given 1-week to decide whether to review; upon acceptance, reviewers have up to 6 weeks to review the submission and to return comments and disposition recommendation to the assigned editor.
  1. Declining a review request
    1. Reviewers should decline to review if the reviewer recognizes the author(s) and believes this will introduce strong bias into the review.
    2. Reviewers should also decline to review if the reviewer has a financial conflict of interest with an entity named in the submission.
    3. Reviewers should also decline to review if the reviewer is aware that they lack sufficient scientific expertise to perform a substantive review of the submission.
  1. Review Delays
    1. To prevent delays, reviewers should notify the assigned editor immediately if they will not be able to complete the review within the 6-week timeline.
  1. Confidentiality
    1. Reviewers shall keep the submission files and all other submission contents confidential while completing the review.
    2. Review documentation should be stored in a secure manner to prevent unauthorized access; documentation can be destroyed once a final disposition has been reached on the submission. 
    3. Comments made during the review of an application or conclusions must never be discussed or disclosed with individuals not involved in the review process.
  1. Writing the Review
    1. The purpose of the review is to provide the assigned editor with an expert opinion regarding the quality of the manuscript under consideration, and should also supply author(s) with explicit feedback on how to improve their submission so that it will be acceptable for publication in JORS.
    2. In order to maintain complete transparency, confidential comments to the editors are not used in the JORS review process. Reviewers should assume that all comments made may be relayed to the author(s).
    3. Reviewers should complete the review form supplied in the JORS review portal, including all narrative responses and check-box questions.
    4. Editing of reviewers' reports
      1. The assigned editor will not edit any comments made by reviewers unless the language is deemed inappropriate or the comments contain information considered confidential.
  1. Initial Disposition of Submission: Assigned editor issues one of the following decisions based on their own and reviewer reports.
    1. Reject
    2. Reject and resubmit
    3. Revise and resubmit
    4. Accept
      1. The article enters the production stage at this point. 
  1. Resubmissions
    1. Author(s) who receive reject and resubmit, or revise and resubmit, will have 2 months to complete the revisions. 
    2. There is no guarantee that manuscript will be accepted, even after revisions have been completed.
    3. Resubmission should also include a revised cover letter that directly addresses how revisions were undertaken.
    4. Resubmissions will begin the peer-review process again, with a second disposition timeline of 4-6 weeks.
    5. At the discretion of the assigned editor, resubmissions with only minor revisions may be reviewed without additional peer-review involvement. 
  1. Production
    1. Following acceptance, the corresponding author will be sent a proof of the copyedited submission files by the production team; this will occur typically within 4 weeks of notification of acceptance. Author(s) should review and approve the accuracy of the changes, as well as respond to any proof requests from the production team. This review and proofreading should be completed within 72-hours of receipt. Substantial changes to the submission are not allowed at this stage.
    2. The approved submission files will be published ahead of issue assignment at JORS, typically within 2 weeks of receipt of the approved files from the author(s).
  1. Review Transparency
    1. In an effort to promote transparency and integrity at JORS, all accepted and published articles will contain the names of all peer reviewers involved with the submission.
    2. This open-upon-acceptance peer-review process is used to promote the highest standards of peer-review, while also creating a process that minimizes the chance of potential bias during the actual peer review.