Peer Review Process
The journal uses Crossref's Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, to conduct plagiarism checks on submitted manuscripts. For publication ethics, the journal will follow the COPE guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct.
Journal had a Desk Rejection Policy. Manuscripts that do not align with the journal's scope will be desk rejected without undergoing external peer review. For manuscripts that meet the basic criteria set by the journal's publication scopes, the Managing Editor will assign them to the Editor-in-Chief or (Executive) Associate Editors for the scientific quality. Our Editor-in-Chief or (Executive) Associate Editors are not involved in making decisions about papers which:
- they have written by themselves.
- have been written by family members or colleagues.
- relate to products or services in which they have an interest.
This journal follows a single-blind review process. Your submission will initially be assessed by our editors to determine suitability for publication in this journal. Submission assigned to Editor-in-Chief or (Executive) Associate Editors will be initially evaluated by for their scientificity, originality, and novelty. Manuscripts that lack novelty or new insights and do not meet the general criteria for publication in this journal will be rejected without external peer review. In such instances, these decisions will be sent as quickly as possible so as not to delay publication elsewhere. For other manuscripts, Editor-in-Chief or (Executive) Associate Editors will invite two or more referees who are active in the field to review the manuscript.
The reviewers act only in an advisory capacity, and the final decision is the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or (Executive) Associate Editors. The reviewers are asked to comment not only on the scientific content but also on the manuscript’s suitability for Journal of Electrochemistry. In general, reviewers return comments in 15 days. The comments will be sent to the authors regardless of whether the manuscript is accepted or not. The manuscript that failed from initial review will be rejected from further review process. The average time from submission to first decision will be one month. The decision as to whether your article is accepted or rejected will be taken by our Editor-in-Chief or (Executive) Associate Editors.
This journal also publishes special issues. The peer review process for these articles is the same as the peer review process of the journal in general.
Additionally, if a guest editor authors an article in their issue/collection, they will not involve the peer review process.
Revised Manuscripts
After the peer review, if a revision is requested for a potentially acceptable manuscript, the authors should upload the revised manuscript via the Journal website as soon as possible. The revision deadlines for Reviews, Perspective, Articles are as follows.
Minor revisions: 14 days
Major revisions: 21 days
Reject and resubmit: 90 days
Owing to their shorter format and higher degree of imperativeness, the revision deadlines for Communications, Highlight and Editorials are as follows:
Minor revisions: 10 days
Major revisions: 15 days
Reject and resubmit: 45 days
If a revised manuscript is returned late and after a period that exceeds the average publication time, the manuscript will be given a new queue date for publication. Revised papers should be accompanied by a point-by-point response to all the comments made by the reviewers. All revised contents in the manuscript should be underlined to facilitate further review. Revised manuscripts are sometimes sent back to the original reviewers, who are asked to comment on the revisions. If only minor revisions are involved, the Editor will examine the revised manuscript in light of the recommendations of the reviewers without seeking further opinions. The final decision to accept or reject a paper will be made by the Editorial Board and the Editorial Office.
