Peer Review Policy
International Aquatic Research's Peer Review Policy is briefly and simply explained here. All submitted manuscripts initially being evaluated in confidential manner by Editorial Office (Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, and Executive Editor) to see whether it will meet the needed quality and relevance requirements in terms of following criteria:
- Importance in the field
- Number and quality of both dependent and independent variables served in the work, extent of work
- Practical approaches improvement taken in the area of study
- Well-established statistics
- Modified linguistic
- Already possible related publication(s) of author(s)
- Plagiarism check
In case of having good quality, it will be gone to evaluation in a peer review process as a single blind peer review strategy (the author's name and affiliation are seeable for reviewers for further probable plagiarism check, the names and affiliation of reviewers are completely hidden from authors). The reviewers are selected by chief editor or associate editors from editorial board or other relevant experts in other universities and research institutes with a good reputation. The review process will normally last up to 2-4 months ahead and at least the report of two and in some occasions three experts required making a decision how to proceed the work in the next step (decision to rejection or revision). Sometimes the required revisions performed by author are not good enough to be affirmed by reviewers and a work might face with 4-5 rounds of revisions. After acceptance and in a couple of days, the fulltext (PDF) will show in the website as Early Access in "Articles in Press" incorporated with its DOI code; beforehand, uncorrected proof would have sent to authors for possible checking and avoiding to any unwanted errors. Finally, in a few days approaching to end of any season (quarterly basis), they will be gone for final production (by assigning the page number) and being released online in the journal's website.
For those manuscripts that seem primitive and poor or have lower quality of mentioned criteria and standards, the decision will be taken to not accept within 1-2 weeks to enable the authors to a possible improving the work and submitting elsewhere.