Peer Review Policy

The Membrane Technology Journal is committed to maintaining a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the highest quality of published research. Our peer review policy is designed to uphold the integrity of scientific communication and provide constructive feedback to authors. Below, we outline our peer review procedures and expectations.

1. Peer Review Process

  • Initial Screening: Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial team to assess their suitability for the journal. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic criteria for relevance, scope, or quality may be rejected without review.

  • Peer Review Selection: Suitable manuscripts are assigned to expert reviewers who are selected based on their expertise in the relevant field. We strive to ensure that each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers to provide a balanced and thorough evaluation.

  • Double-Blind Review: The Membrane Technology Journal employs a double-blind review process, where both the reviewers and authors are anonymized to prevent bias. Reviewers are provided with the manuscript without knowing the identity of the authors, and authors are not informed of the reviewers’ identities.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their evaluation of the manuscript. If a conflict arises, reviewers should recuse themselves from the review process.

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers are required to treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential. Information about the manuscript should not be shared with others or used for personal advantage.

  • Objectivity: Reviewers must provide objective and constructive feedback based on the scientific merit of the work. They should assess the manuscript’s originality, methodology, results, and relevance to the field, offering detailed comments and suggestions for improvement.

  • Timeliness: Reviewers should complete their evaluation within the agreed timeframe to ensure a prompt review process. If reviewers are unable to meet the deadline, they should inform the editorial office as soon as possible.

3. Author Responsibilities

  • Response to Reviewers: Authors are required to address all reviewer comments and provide a detailed response outlining the changes made to the manuscript. Authors should also explain any disagreements with the reviewers’ suggestions.

  • Revisions: Revised manuscripts are subject to further review if necessary. Authors should ensure that revisions are made comprehensively and resubmit the manuscript along with a point-by-point response to reviewers’ comments.

  • Ethical Compliance: Authors must ensure that their research complies with ethical standards and guidelines. This includes proper citation of sources, disclosure of conflicts of interest, and adherence to guidelines for human and animal research.

4. Decision Making

  • Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers’ feedback and the editorial team’s assessment, the editor will make one of the following decisions: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. The decision will be communicated to the authors along with the reviewers’ comments.

  • Revisions and Resubmission: If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript addressing the reviewers’ comments. The revised manuscript will be reviewed again, and further revisions may be requested before a final decision is made.

  • Appeals: Authors may appeal editorial decisions if they believe there has been a misunderstanding or if new information becomes available. Appeals should be submitted in writing and will be reviewed by the editorial team.

5. Transparency and Integrity

  • Editorial Independence: The editorial board operates independently of the publisher and is responsible for making unbiased publication decisions based on the merit of the research. Editors and reviewers are required to adhere to ethical guidelines and avoid conflicts of interest.

  • Publication Ethics: The journal adheres to ethical standards for publication, including avoiding plagiarism, ensuring the accuracy of the research, and maintaining confidentiality throughout the review process.