Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Forensic Science and Research (JFSR) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review policy to ensure the integrity, transparency, and quality of published research. Peer review is central to scholarly publishing, and our process ensures that all manuscripts are evaluated fairly, objectively, and confidentially.

Objectives of Peer Review

  • To maintain the highest scientific and ethical standards in forensic science publishing.
  • To provide constructive feedback to authors for improving their manuscripts.
  • To ensure research integrity, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
  • To assist editors in making well-informed publication decisions.

Review Model

JFSR employs a double-blind review system, where both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the process. This minimizes bias and ensures objective evaluation.

Peer Review Process

  1. Initial Screening: Submitted manuscripts are checked by the editorial office for compliance with guidelines, plagiarism, and scope.
  2. Editorial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor assesses the manuscript for scientific relevance and originality.
  3. Reviewer Assignment: Manuscripts are sent to at least two independent experts in the field.
  4. Review Reports: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide detailed feedback, comments, and a recommendation (accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject).
  5. Editorial Decision: Editors make a decision based on reviewer reports and their assessment.
  6. Revision and Resubmission: Authors are given an opportunity to revise manuscripts in response to reviewer comments.
  7. Final Decision: After revisions, editors may accept the manuscript, request further review, or reject it.

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, unbiased, and constructive feedback.
  • Maintain confidentiality and not share or use manuscript content for personal gain.
  • Identify potential ethical concerns, plagiarism, or conflicts of interest.
  • Deliver reports within the specified timeframe to avoid publication delays.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted to JFSR are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers, editors, and staff are prohibited from disclosing any information about a manuscript under review, except as part of the review process.

Conflict of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers who recognize conflicts must decline review invitations. Editors will reassign manuscripts to ensure impartiality.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors who disagree with editorial decisions may appeal by providing a detailed response letter. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, and in complex cases, external reviewers may be consulted.

Ethical Oversight

JFSR adheres to COPE guidelines on peer review ethics. Allegations of misconduct during peer review are investigated promptly, with corrective measures such as reviewer removal or editorial board actions implemented when necessary.

Reviewer Recognition

JFSR acknowledges the critical contribution of peer reviewers by providing recognition through:

  • Optional Publons/ReviewerCredits integration.
  • Certificates of appreciation upon request.
  • Listing of active reviewers annually (with consent).

FAQs

How long does peer review take?

The average review time is 4–6 weeks, depending on reviewer availability.

Can authors suggest reviewers?

Yes. Authors may suggest reviewers during submission, but the editorial office retains final authority.

How many reviewers are assigned to each manuscript?

Typically, two reviewers are assigned. In special cases, additional reviewers may be consulted.

Commitment to Quality

Through rigorous double-blind peer review, JFSR ensures that published research is credible, original, and contributes meaningfully to the advancement of forensic science. Peer review is not just an evaluation tool but a collaborative process that strengthens scholarly communication.