|
Dual Track Peer Review Process:
HERA's
"Author Directed" Option
The Journal of Human and Ecological Risk Assessment (HERA) has instituted a dual track peer review process. This provides authors with a choice between the current anonymous peer review process and what is called the
"author directed" peer review process in which the author would playa key role in suggesting reviewers and coordinating the review process.
Option 1: The anonymous peer review process follows the standard paradigm encompassed by the majority of scientific journals. Briefly stated, the current system involves the evaluation of manuscripts by anonymous reviewers. In this way, the manuscript leaves the control of the author, entering the domain of reviewer anonymity and the editorial verdict.
Option 2: Author directed peer review will be achieved by requiring that the reviewer provide a fully documented evaluation, involving fully open (i.e., not blind) discussion and possibly debate with the author. In the end, the reviewer must agree in writing that the paper is either acceptable, or not, for publication. If the paper is accepted, the accepting reviewer must be listed as a referee who agreed that the paper should be published. The accepting reviewer is also permitted to offer a 500?word commentary on the paper, highlighting any significance or uncertainties remaining in the paper. For further discussion of the rationale behind this approach, see the Message from the
Editor-in-Chief in HERA 5(6).
Format for the author directed peer review process
Author(s) develops manuscript.
Corresponding author contacts several possible reviewers to solicit their willingness to referee the manuscript.
Corresponding author contacts HERA's managing editor of intent to submit manuscript for publication and provides a list of suggested reviewers, along with a brief summary of their qualifications.
Managing editor approves and recommends reviewers that may include reviewers not on the author's list. Editor informs author to contact reviewers, and sends the
authors a review package containing instructions to reviewers, form letters, and signature pages for the journal.
Corresponding author sends manuscript to reviewers as selected by editor.
Reviewers send written comments directly to corresponding author.
Corresponding author sends revised manuscript responses to reviewers.
Reviewers then decide on acceptability of the manuscript by written
affirmation.
Reviewer(s) have the option to write up to 500 words concerning any potential reservation and/or comment on an accepted manuscript.
Corresponding author sends completed package to journal managing editor, i.e., original manuscript, reviewers' critique, author's
responses, revised manuscript, and possible 500-word commentary by reviewers.
Editor-in-chief determines whether HERA should accept the revised manuscript for publication, or returned to author for further revision.
Accepted manuscript is published in the next available issue and reviewers' names listed with the article along with any submitted commentaries.
|
