Peer Review Policy
To ensure the academic quality of the Journal of Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute, we strictly implement a peer review system and a three-review process.
1. Double-blind peer review by experts. All submissions to the Journal are evaluated by at least two peer reviewers. To ensure that peer reviewers can evaluate manuscripts objectively and impartially, double-blind peer review is adopted, meaning reviewers and authors are anonymous to each other.
2. Three-review process. All manuscripts must go through i) initial screening by the deputy editor-in-chief, ii) peer review by at least two reviewers, and iii) final review by the editor-in-chief. In cases where disputes arise, the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial committee determine the final result after discussion.
3. The Journal’s review criteria include: whether the title is appropriate, whether the article structure is reasonable, whether the research content is innovative, whether the experimental data is accurate and reliable, whether the study has new results, new insights or new experiences, whether the research methodology is innovative or improved, whether the written expressions are clear and concise, whether the use of terminology is standardized, and whether there are practical applications. Based on these criteria, peer reviewers and the editor-in-chief conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the manuscript.
1. All manuscripts must first go through plagiarism detection and academic screening by the deputy editor-in-chief. Papers with a similarity rate of 10%-30% will be rejected or returned to the author for revision depending on the severity, while papers with a similarity rate of 30% or higher are directly rejected. This process takes 1-2 weeks.
2. Papers that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two peer reviewers according to their disciplinary backgrounds and research content. Reviewers must strictly follow the publication ethics of our journal and provide a recommendation of acceptance, acceptance with revisions, revision for further review, or rejection. This process takes approximately 1-2 months, depending on the availability of reviewers.
3. Papers that have completed peer review are sent to the Editor-in-Chief for final review. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision in consideration of the opinions from the initial screening and peer reviewers. In cases of dispute, the Editor-in-Chief will hold discussions with members of the editorial board and make a decision. This process typically takes within 1 month.
4. Accepted manuscripts will undergo a second round of plagiarism detection one month before formal publication.
Overall, the peer review system and three-review process are essential for maintaining the high-quality academic standards of the Journal and ensuring the impartial evaluation of all submissions.