Peer Review Policy

Frontiers in Interdisciplinary Applied Science

1. Introduction

Frontiers in Interdisciplinary Applied Science (FIAS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of peer review. All manuscripts submitted to FIAS undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original research. This policy outlines the procedures and criteria used during the peer review process.

2. Types of Peer Review

FIAS employs a double-blind peer review process, where both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other. This ensures impartial and unbiased evaluations of the manuscripts.

3. Initial Manuscript Evaluation

Upon submission, each manuscript is initially assessed by the editorial team to ensure it meets the journal’s scope and quality standards. Manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s aims or fail to meet basic quality criteria are desk-rejected without external review.

4. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, experience, and previous contributions to the field. The editorial team maintains a diverse pool of reviewers to ensure a broad range of perspectives. Reviewers are invited based on their ability to provide a thorough, fair, and timely review.

5. Peer Review Process

  • Assignment: Manuscripts passing the initial evaluation are assigned to at least two independent reviewers.
  • Review Criteria: Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on originality, significance, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and relevance to interdisciplinary applied science.
  • Review Reports: Reviewers provide detailed reports with recommendations: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject. Constructive feedback is provided to help authors improve their manuscripts.
  • Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript and review process as confidential. They must not share or discuss the manuscript with anyone outside the review process.

6. Decision Making

The editorial team considers the reviewers’ recommendations and makes a final decision. Possible outcomes include:

  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted as is or with minor revisions.
  • Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor changes, and authors are given a set timeframe to address the reviewers’ comments.
  • Major Revisions: The manuscript requires substantial changes. Authors are invited to resubmit the revised manuscript for further review.
  • Reject: The manuscript is rejected based on reviewers’ recommendations and does not meet the journal’s standards.

7. Revision and Resubmission

Authors receiving revision requests must address the reviewers’ comments and submit a revised manuscript. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation. Authors are encouraged to provide a detailed response to each comment.

8. Appeal Process

Authors who believe their manuscript was wrongly rejected can appeal the decision. Appeals must be based on evidence that the review process was flawed or that significant new information has come to light. The editorial team will review appeals and may consult additional reviewers.

9. Ethical Considerations

FIAS adheres to ethical guidelines for peer review, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves if a conflict arises.

10. Reviewer Acknowledgment

FIAS acknowledges the invaluable contribution of its reviewers in maintaining the quality and integrity of the journal. Reviewers are recognized annually, and their contributions are highlighted on the journal’s website.

11. Continuous Improvement

FIAS is committed to continuously improving the peer review process. Feedback from authors and reviewers is regularly sought and used to enhance the review experience.