Peer Review Process

Sin-Chn Publisher adopts double-blind peer-reviewed policy. Peer review process is used to assess the quality of a new manuscript. Editor-in-Chief will pre-check the overall scientific soundness, scope and integrality of the submission. If the structure of submission is complete and it is consistent with the field of scope of the journal, then it will pass to the assistant editor. An academic editor will screen the originality of the new submission and the possibility of plagiarism as well as the relevance of references. If it is passed the screen of originality, then it will be assigned to at least three independent reviewers for peer-reviewed. If there is evidence that it has any possibility of plagiarism, the new manuscript will not go on the next stage. At least two reports submitted to Editor-in-Chief, and he/she will make a final decision whether it is accepted or rejected or revised. Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the academic quality of the publication process.

Authors could recommend the list of potential reviewers, and assistant editor will ensure there is no potential conflict of interest. Regards of the conflict of interest, Guest Editors should not access the peer-review process and make decisions on their own manuscripts submitted to a Special Issue. Editor-in-Chief or other Editorial Board member will instead his/her responsibility. Similarly, editors from the Editorial Board members will avoid reviewing a manuscript if he/she is one of the authors, or he/she comes from the some institute with the authors.

If the reports have different decisions, assistant editor will seek another comment from an Editorial Board member or the Editor-in-Chief before making the final decision. Editors of staff during the peer review process will never make any decision.

Accepted manuscript will be passed to the production stage.



Article process periods:

Pre-check: 3 days

Screen the originality: 1 day

Peer review process: 20 days

Minor revisions: 7 days

Major revisions: 20 days


Make a decision:

Reports with 2 accepted and 1 rejected: accepted

Reports with 1 accepted and 2 rejected: rejected

Reports with 1 accepted and 1 rejected: seeking other report before final decision


Authors should reply a report with point-by-point details of explanation, or appeal a rejection by e-mail to the Editorial Office within three months. Editor-in-Chief will organize the team of experts to hold an academic debate, and the final decision will be validated by the Editor-in-Chief at this stage.