Peer Review Process

The Global Journal of Materials Chemistry (GJMC) utilizes a double-blind peer review process. This approach ensures that reviewers remain unaware of the authors' identities, while authors do not have knowledge of who the reviewers are. This serves to guarantee that the assessments are equitable and unbiased. We implement a stringent and detailed peer review process that upholds the superior scientific and ethical standards of our journal. The process of peer review initiates with a preliminary assessment of the manuscript conducted by the editors, who evaluate its fit for publication in our journals and verify compliance with our guidelines and standards. Manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements will be declined. Our team is committed to taking all necessary steps to facilitate the swift and accurate publication of any type of article. The initiation of the peer review process occurs when a manuscript is submitted to our journal. Authors are required to submit their manuscripts via the journal's online submission system. This platform facilitates the inclusion of all required files and information. Upon the submission of a manuscript, an identification number will be automatically assigned to the corresponding author for the submitted work. The review process for manuscripts involves verifying their completeness and incorporating the use of specialized software to detect plagiarism. We will implement all essential measures to avert plagiarism and the improper use of data acquired through the peer review process of submitted articles. The author is required to give proper credit to the materials referenced in the article. The assessment criteria involve the significance of the study, the robustness of the methodology, the ethical considerations upheld, the clarity of the exposition, and the relevance of the subject matter. Every article is assessed for proper formatting and carefully scrutinized for grammatical and formatting mistakes.

Following the initial screening process, the manuscript will be forwarded for peer review to a minimum of two independent experts in the relevant field. Invitations to review will be sent out by the scientific sub-editor via email. The designated Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor will choose two reviewers, those who are perfectly fit to review the manuscript. These reviewers will be selected based on their qualifications and experience, and they will assess the originality and scientific merit of the manuscript. Reviewers are required to respond to the review invitation within three days, either accepting or declining the request. If a reviewer decline, the editor will seek out additional reviewers to ensure that there are no delays in the process. Reviewers are provided with the essential information required to perform a comprehensive and well-informed assessment. The comments provided by reviewers to the editors are confidential and will be rendered anonymous before it is communicated to the author. The editors will reach a decision regarding the manuscript based on the feedback provided by the reviewers. The outcome may entail accepting the manuscript for publication, asking for revisions, or deciding to reject the manuscript. When a manuscript is accepted, it means that the journal will publish it as is, without the need for any content modifications or adjustments. If modifications are required, the authors will be provided with a detailed enumeration of the changes to be implemented, as well as a timeline with a sufficient duration for resubmission. Authors can track the progress of their manuscript during the peer-review process. Authors are provided with the decision and the feedback from the reviewers. They subsequently revise the manuscript in line with this feedback and resubmit it for further consideration. In the revision stage, it is necessary to confirm that all revisions are provided to us in a single communication. The updated version of the manuscript must be submitted online as a new manuscript by the authors, along with a cover letter that addresses the reviewers' comments in a point-by-point format. The modified manuscript is assessed by either the initial reviewers or new reviewers, ensuring that all concerns have been thoroughly resolved. Following the acceptance of the manuscript by the editorial team, it will undergo copyediting, layout editing, and proofreading to maintain the linguistic integrity of the work. Following the editing stage, authors must ensure that they carefully examine the final version of the file before it is made available online. The manuscript will be reviewed one last time by our editors before publication to ensure that all modifications have been addressed and that it is fully prepared for release. The manuscript will be published in the current issue by the publisher, and the editor will notify the author through email. A Digital Object Identifier (DOI) will be assigned to every manuscript, facilitating permanent citation.

To maintain ethical and transparent review processes, it is crucial to uphold manuscript confidentiality, steer clear of conflicts of interest, and offer constructive feedback to authors that is based on the quality and integrity of their research. Furthermore, submissions must be treated equitably, while also complying with ethical standards in research and publication, including the prompt resolution of misconduct allegations. We reserve the right to perform post-publication reviews, make corrections, and issue retractions as deemed necessary, contingent upon additional evaluations or ethical considerations. Should an author wish to contest the reviewers' decision, it is advisable to reach out to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. Once the author submits an appeal, the Editor-in-Chief will assess the manuscript and the feedback from peer reviewers to arrive at a decision concerning the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. If deemed necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may assign the manuscript to different referees for further peer review. The decision made by the Editor-in-Chief is conclusive in these circumstances. The journal aims to promptly handle and resolve all complaints received. Every complaint submitted will be acknowledged within a timeframe of two working days. The journal's approach to handling and resolving complaints is structured to maintain equity for authors who file complaints as well as for those who are the recipients of such complaints. The peer review process of the journal ensures that all components are well protected. The journal does not charge any submission fees; however, it does require an Article Processing Charge (APC) of USD 99 once manuscripts have been accepted.