Peer ReviewPolicy
Submitted papers are via an online submission system (http://zgwjfxhx.bgrimm.cn/zgwjfxhxen/ch/author/login.aspx). All published papers in Chinese Journal of Inorganic Analytical Chemistry (also referred to as the Journal) are strictly peer reviewed (Peer-review is defined as the process of contributions receiving comments from relevant experts in the field). Generally, a minimum of 2 peer reviewers are chosen for the single-blind peer review process. The editorial department strictly follows a system of three-stage review and three-stage proofreading. All manuscripts are cross-checked by the responsible editor and other editors, reviewed by the executive editor, reviewed by external experts and scholars, and proofread by the authors themselves, and go through more than several processes to avoid errors.
The Journal’s review process is as follows:
First step: Initial review by the editorial department
The submitted papers will be initially reviewed with respect to the orientation, the topic selection and academic level. The check also includes plagiarism detection through AMLC system powered by CNKI to prevent academic misconduct. Text copy ratio should be lower than 15%. The papers that satisfied the requirements of the Journal will be subject to expert review process and those fail will be rejected.
After receiving the manuscript, the editorial department first conducts an initial review, including:
(1) Verifying whether the manuscript meets the requirements of this journal for accepting manuscripts and whether the repetition rate of the manuscript is within the requirements of the journal;
(2) Verifying whether the various elements constituting the manuscript are complete, whether the charts meet the requirements, and whether the format is standardized;
(3) How is the academic and scientific nature of the manuscript, and determine whether to send it for external review.
The initial review results from the editorial department generally fall into three categories:
(1) Send for external review
After the initial review, manuscripts considered to have publishing value are sent to two peer experts for parallel review.
(2) Return for supplementation or modification
If the content description of the manuscript is not complete enough, the repetition rate or language of the article does not pass, the author is informed of the places where the manuscript needs to be supplemented or modified. After the modification is completed, the manuscript returns to the editorial department, and re-enters the initial review stage.
(3) Rejection
If the editor considers that the manuscript does not meet the category or submission requirements of the journal, it will not be sent for external review, and the manuscript will be directly returned.
The second step: Peer review
The main purpose of peer review is to improve the academic level of the submitted manuscript.
(1) Form of peer review: two peer experts, parallel and single-blind review.
(2) Selection of reviewers
The reviewers of this journal are all well-known experts and scholars in this field, recommended and invited by the editorial board to become reviewers. Authors can also recommend reviewers.
(3) Manuscript review criteria
Review experts mainly give professional judgments on the manuscript based on the following review criteria:
-Whether the content of the manuscript is innovative;
-The scientific and engineering significance of the topic selection, how original, forward-looking, and practical the article is;
-Whether there are major defects in the manuscript, how accurate and reliable the theoretical derivation, concepts, data, and charts are, and whether they support the research content and conclusions of the manuscript;
-How is the integrity and readability of the manuscript, how reasonable, accurate, and complete the structure is, and how clear the logic is; whether a clear exposition is given on the research problem, and how valid and effective the conclusion of the article is.
(4) Results of peer review
Each manuscript is requested by at least two peer review experts to give professional opinions based on the review criteria, and the responsible editor integrates the opinions of the two review experts to make the following decisions:
-Accept
-Minor Revisions;
- Major Revisions;
-Reject
Minor Revisions: The manuscript needs minor revisions, and after the minor revisions, it will be submitted for re-review.
Major Revisions: The manuscript needs major revisions. When the author returns the revised manuscript, it needs to reply to the review comments one by one. The responsible editor determines whether to enter the re-review stage or return to the external review stage for re-review based on the revised manuscript and the reply to the review comments.
Rejection: If both peer reviewers give a rejection treatment, then a rejection treatment will be carried out, along with the review comments.
Then, the manuscript will be submitted to the executive editor for re-review.
The third step: Re-review
The executive editor conducts a re-review based on the initial review of the editorial department and the results of peer review, gives a re-review opinion, and makes the following decisions:
-Accept
-Minor Revisions;
-Major Revisions;
-Reject
Then, the manuscript will be submitted to the executive editor for re-review.
The fourth step: Final review
The Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief makes a final processing decision based on the initial review of the editorial department, the results of peer review, and the re-review opinions, determining whether to accept and suggesting the publication time.
Selection of reviewers
At present, reviewers are divided into two categories: in-house reviewers of the editorial department and external reviewers. In-house reviewers are served by the editorial board and young editorial board members of this journal, and external reviewers are composed of experts, scholars, and researchers in this field at home and abroad.
Submission by editorial board members and editors
Submissions by editorial board members and editors must also comply with all review and editing procedures of the journal. Editorial board members and editors must not participate in the review work, editing work, and acceptance decisions of papers written by themselves, their family members, and colleagues. Peer review must be conducted independently of the relevant authors, editors, and their research groups.
Editorial policy
Editorial modifications: In accordance with the relevant provisions of the "Copyright Law", this journal can make textual modifications and deletions to the manuscripts, and for modifications involving the original intention, the author is requested to consider.
Modification time limit: The review results of manuscripts are generally notified to the authors within 1 to 2 months. For individual manuscripts, the review time may be longer. If the review results have not been received after more than 2 months, the author can contact the editorial department and submit elsewhere on their own.
Requirements for originality of manuscripts
-Manuscript plagiarism check: At the initial review stage, iThenticate will be used for plagiarism check, and the repetition rate needs to be within 20%.
-Author attribution: Author attribution is limited only to those who have made important contributions to proposing research topics, designing research schemes, and conducting processing and interpretation of research work; those who have made important contributions should be attributed. Other personnel involved in the research work should be listed in the acknowledgments.
-Citation of references: For references that are of important significance to the article, they need to be listed in the reference section.
Endogeny
Endogeny must be minimised. The proportion of published research papers where at least one of the authors is an editor, editorial board member, or reviewer must not exceed 25% in either of the latest two issues. The articles display submitted/accepted/online dates.
For Special Issue
The journal that publishes special issues or other content curated by guest editors adheres to the following additional criteria: The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the content of the entire journal, including all special issues, which must fall within the scope of the journal. Guest editors are responsible for special issue topic selection planning and manuscript collection. Special issue articles have the same editorial oversight as regular papers. The journal ensures that guest editors’credentials are checked and approved. The EiC or dedicated board members oversee the guest editors. Papers submitted to a special issue by the guest editor(s) are handled under an independent review process and make up no more than 25% of the issue's total.