Peer Review Model

Journal Marine Inside (EJMI) applies double-anonymous peer review for research articles, reviews, scientifically substantiated case studies, and technical/scientific notes. Authors' identities are concealed from reviewers, and the identities of manuscript reviewers are not disclosed to authors. Scientific discussions and replies may receive editorial assessment and external review as appropriate to their content.

1. Submission and Initial Screening

The editorial office checks the manuscript's relevance to the journal scope, completeness, technical formatting, originality, ethics declarations, and suitability for review. Manuscripts may be returned for administrative correction or declined without external review if they fail essential standards.

2. Reviewer Assignment

A suitable manuscript is assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are selected on competence, independence, availability, and the absence of material conflicts of interest. Reviewer invitations, acceptance, and reports are recorded in OJS. Authors must remove identifying information from the review version of the manuscript.

3. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess originality, relevance, methodological transparency, adequacy of evidence, data analysis, logical interpretation, literature engagement, reproducibility where applicable, clarity, and ethical compliance. Recommendations may include acceptance, revision, or rejection. Reviewers provide reasoned comments rather than relying on numerical ratings alone.

4. Revision and Decision

Authors receive editorial instructions and anonymized review comments and must submit a revised manuscript with a point-by-point response. Additional review may be requested when substantial changes are made. Editorial decisions include accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. The handling editor evaluates reviewers' comments and the author response; the Editor-in-Chief oversees editorial standards and final decisions.

5. Conflicts of Interest and Independence

An editor who is an author, collaborator, close colleague, supervisor, or otherwise conflicted must recuse themselves. The manuscript is reassigned to a qualified independent editor. Author identity is not used as a substitute for scientific evaluation. Reviewers must decline assignments that they cannot assess independently.

6. Confidentiality and Timing

Unpublished submissions and review reports are confidential. Reviewers are generally asked to complete reviews within a reasonable period, with extensions when justified. No fixed submission-to-publication time is guaranteed. Any average processing time published by the journal must be calculated from actual OJS records and updated as needed.

7. Post-review Quality Control

Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, layout, author proofreading, reference checks, verification of affiliations and ORCID iDs, DOI and metadata checks, and a final assessment of required article declarations before publication.

Related policies: Publication Ethics, Author Guidelines, Retraction Policy.