Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to Unesa Journal of Chemistry undergo a rigorous, fair, and transparent evaluation process to ensure the quality, originality, and scientific integrity of published articles. The journal applies a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the process.
- Initial Screening (Editorial Check)
Upon receipt, the Editorial Office checks each manuscript for:
- Conformity with the journal’s focus and scope
- Compliance with the author guidelines and the journal template
- Completeness of the submission (title page, abstract, and references)
- Similarity with previously published work, using the Turnitin plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with a similarity index above 25% (excluding references) may be returned to the authors or rejected.
Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage (desk rejection) or returned to the authors for revision before further processing. This stage normally takes up to 2 weeks.
- Editor-in-Chief / Section Editor Assessment
The Editor-in-Chief or a designated Section Editor evaluates the manuscript’s novelty, scientific contribution, and methodological soundness. Suitable manuscripts are assigned to reviewers. The editor may reject a manuscript without external review if it is judged to be of insufficient quality or outside the journal’s scope.
- Double-Blind Peer Review
Each manuscript is sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest. The peer review stage normally takes 3–6 weeks, including the invitation of reviewers. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on:
- Originality and significance of the research
- Relevance to the journal’s scope
- Quality of the research design and methodology
- Accuracy and validity of data analysis and interpretation
- Clarity and organization of the writing
- Adequacy and currency of references
- Ethical considerations
Reviewers give one of the following recommendations:
- Accept without revision
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
- Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editor makes one of the following decisions:
- Accepted: the manuscript is accepted for publication.
- Revisions Required (Minor/Major): the authors must revise the manuscript according to the reviewers’ comments.
- Resubmit for Review: substantial changes are needed, and the revised manuscript will be reviewed again.
- Declined: the manuscript is rejected and cannot be considered further.
If the reviewers’ opinions conflict, the editor may invite an additional reviewer before making a final decision.
- Revision
Authors are expected to submit the revised manuscript together with a point-by-point response letter explaining how each comment was addressed, or a justification where a suggestion was not followed. Authors are normally given 2–4 weeks to revise (minor revisions: up to 2 weeks; major revisions: up to 4 weeks). The editor may send the revised manuscript back to the original reviewers for verification.
- Final Decision and Production
Once the revisions are satisfactory, the manuscript is accepted and enters the production stage: copyediting, layout/typesetting, and proofreading by the authors. Accepted articles are assigned a DOI and published online in the next available issue.
Reviewer Responsibilities
- Maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and not share or use its content before publication
- Provide objective, constructive, and respectful feedback
- Declare any conflict of interest and decline the review if one exists
- Complete the review within the agreed time frame
- Alert the editor to suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, or ethical violations
Editorial Decision Timeline (Estimated)
| Stage | Estimated Time |
|---|---|
| Initial screening | up to 2 weeks |
| Peer review | 3–6 weeks |
| Author revision | 2–4 weeks |
| Final decision | up to 2 weeks |
| Total (from submission to decision) | about 8–13 weeks |
Appeals
Authors who disagree with a rejection decision may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief with a clear scientific justification. The appeal will be reviewed by the editorial board, and its decision is final.