Review is an evaluation process by which selection of the manuscripts can be done for a specific journal. Peer review proceeds are a designed framework to assess the validity, originality and quality of research work. There are a lot of critics on peer review; however, it is the only acceptable method to validate the scientific research work. Boffin Access adopted an internationally accepted peer review process by which high quality articles can be selected in order to maintain scholarly journals for long time.
In publisher prospective, peer review is a process by which articles will be filtered and high quality content will be published in high quality journals. Articles passed through the peer review add value to the content published; therefore, publishers ensure that the review process is partial, fair and robust. The expert review process will help in find flawless research work, validation of methods, and provide feedback to the authors. It enhances the author’s chances to reframe the work and publish flawless.
There are different kind of peer review process based on the anonymity of the reviewers and authors. Single blind review, double blind review and open review processes.
Single Blind Review Process: In this process the reviewer details can be hidden. The anonymity of the reviewer allows making impartial decisions. This is considered as the most common and traditional method in scientific publishing.
Double Blind Review Process: In this method, the anonymity of both reviewer and author allows less conflict. The author anonymity prevents reviewer bias such a racial, geographical variations. The selection of papers could be done by based on quality of the work rather than author reputation.
Open Review Process: In this method, both reviewer and author details are open to each other. Some believe this is a proper and honest method for scholarly publishing; however, most of the publishers not following as of now since they trust this allow the reviewers tone down in criticism.
Boffin Access is committed to ensure the integrity of review process, hence we request all our reviewers to follow the code of conduct to avoid conflict and to be respected by scientific communities. We request our others and editors to maintain the confidentiality of the review process unless it is necessary to share with people involved.