At Additives for Polymers Journal, we are dedicated to upholding the highest standards of peer review to ensure the quality, credibility, and integrity of the research we publish. Our peer review process is designed to provide constructive feedback, enhance the rigor of published studies, and maintain the journal’s scientific excellence.

1. Peer Review Process

• Single-Blind Review: Our journal employs a single-blind review process, where reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, but authors do not know the identities of the reviewers. This approach aims to maintain the objectivity and impartiality of the review process.

• Initial Screening: Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial team to assess their alignment with the journal’s scope and quality standards. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic criteria may be rejected without review.

• Selection of Reviewers: Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to expert reviewers in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and experience related to the manuscript’s topic.

• Review Criteria: Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several criteria, including originality, scientific rigor, relevance to the journal’s scope, methodology, data analysis, and clarity of presentation. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations for improvement.

• Decision-Making: Based on reviewers' feedback, the editorial team makes a decision regarding the manuscript. Decisions may include acceptance, minor or major revisions, or rejection. Authors receive detailed comments from reviewers to address any issues identified.

• Revisions: If revisions are required, authors are given a chance to revise and resubmit their manuscript. Revised manuscripts are typically reviewed by the same reviewers to ensure that the revisions adequately address the feedback provided.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all manuscripts and related information as confidential. They should not disclose or discuss the content of the manuscript with others outside the review process.

• Impartiality: Reviewers are expected to provide unbiased and objective evaluations. Any potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed to the editorial team to avoid compromising the review process.

• Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide constructive and detailed feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts. Comments should be clear, relevant, and aimed at enhancing the quality of the research.

• Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their review within the stipulated time frame. If unable to review within the given time, reviewers should notify the editorial office as soon as possible.

3. Author Responsibilities

• Accuracy: Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are accurate, original, and complete. They should provide all necessary data, references, and information to support their findings.

• Ethical Compliance: Authors must comply with ethical standards, including obtaining necessary approvals for research involving human subjects or animals. They should disclose any potential conflicts of interest and funding sources.

• Revisions: Authors should respond to reviewer comments and make necessary revisions in a timely manner. A detailed response to reviewers’ comments should accompany revised manuscripts.

4. Confidentiality and Ethics

• Confidentiality: All participants in the peer review process, including authors, reviewers, and editors, must maintain the confidentiality of the review process and manuscript details.

• Ethical Conduct: The peer review process must be conducted with the highest ethical standards. Any allegations of misconduct or unethical behavior will be investigated thoroughly.

5. Appeals and Complaints

• Appeals: Authors who wish to appeal a decision can submit a formal appeal to the editorial office. Appeals should include a clear explanation of the grounds for the appeal and any new evidence or information.

• Complaints: Any complaints regarding the peer review process or ethical issues should be directed to the editorial office. Complaints will be reviewed and addressed appropriately.

6. Contact Information

For any questions or concerns regarding the peer review process, please contact us at editor@additivesforpolymers.org or visit our website. We are committed to ensuring a fair and transparent review process and addressing any issues promptly.