Share this page :  
         Current Issue
Subscription Form
News Letter

Nature & Environment
[A Biannual Peer Reviewd International Journal of Natural Sciences]

Peer Review Process



What is Peer Review?

The process by which original articles and grants written by researchers are evaluated for technical and scientific quality and correctness by one or more experts in the same field.

How the Peer Review Process Works?

CRSD’s every journal application process has its own protocols. This typically works something like this:

When a group of scientists completes a study and writes it up, hey prepare it in the form of article and submit it to the Editor of a journal for the publication.

Ø  The  journal’s editor  send the submitted article for  reviews to some of the expertise who work in the same field, so can filter out the poor quality papers, to avoid cluttering the peer review process with substandard the research.

Ø  Peers (reviewers) provide feedback on the article.

Ø  Peers tell the editor whether or not they think the study is of high enough quality to be published.

Ø  The remaining papers are sent to referees for further approval, usually to two leading experts in the field.

Ø  Generally speaking, the editor’s word is final, and the referees are there on a purely consultation basis.

Ø  The authors may then revise their article and resubmit for the further consideration.


Editor accepted those articles that meet good scientific standards. If an article does not maintain sufficiently the high standards, it may be rejected at that point.

Peer reviewed articles provide a trusted form of research communication.

Types of Peer Review Process:

The three most common types of peer review are:

Ø  Single Blind Peer Review

Ø  Double Blind Peer Review

Ø  Open Peer Review

However, other models have evolved which include key variations from the standard approach. These include:

Ø  Transferable Peer Review

Ø  Collaborative Peer Review

Ø  Post Publication Peer Review

Single Blind Peer Review:

In this type of peer review the author does not know who the reviewers are. Means that the identity of the reviewer is anonymous, but the author’s name and affiliation are on the paper. Like the other forms of reviewing, there are advantages and disadvantages to single-blind.

Double Blind Peer Review:

This is the most common form of peer review. To facilitate this, the authors need to ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in a way that does not give away their identity. In this policy of peer review the reviewers of the paper won’t get know identity of author(s), and the author(s) won’t get to know the identity of the reviewer.

Open Peer Review:

The identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other at any point during the publication process. There is a growing minority of journals using this form of peer review but popularity among reviewers is yet to be proven.

Transferable Peer Review:

This is a fairly new form of peer review which allows subject-related journals to transfer reviewed manuscripts between each other. Typically, an author submits their paper to a journal but after it has been reviewed the editors decide that although not suitable for their journal it is likely to be appropriate for a similar journal. The author is then given an option to transfer the manuscript to the other journal. It's important to note that transferring a manuscript does not guarantee acceptance in the other journal. If the author agrees to the transfer, all manuscript files, metadata and reviewer report forms are sent to the receiving journal.

Collaborative Peer Review:

This covers a broad variety of approaches in which a team of people work together to undertake the review. One format is to have two or more reviewers work together to review the paper, discuss their opinions and submit a unified report. Another approach is to have one or more reviewers collaborate with the author to improve the paper, until it reaches a publishable standard.


Post Publication Peer Review:

With this type of peer review, the option for appraisal and revision of a paper continues - or occurs - after publication. This may take the form of a comments page or discussion forum alongside the published paper. Crucially, post publication peer review does not exclude other forms of peer review and is usually in addition to, rather than instead of, pre-publication review.


Becoming a Reviewer:

Getting involved in the peer review process can be a highly rewarding experience that can also improve your own research and help to further your career.

If you’re just starting out as a reviewer, don’t be deterred. Journal editors are often looking to expand their pool of reviewers, which means there will be a demand for your particular area of expertise.

There is no one way to become a reviewer, but there are some common routes. These include:

Ø  Asking a colleague who already reviews for a journal to recommend you

Ø  Networking with editors at professional conferences

Ø  Becoming a member of a learned society and then networking with other members in your area

Ø  Contacting journals directly to inquire if they are seeking new reviewers

Ø  Seeking mentorship from senior colleagues

Ø  Working for senior researchers who may then delegate peer review duties to you

You could also try finding a journal with a mentoring program for early career researchers looking to become reviewers. 

Who Can Become a Reviewer?

In short, qualified, capable and enthusiastic people those are willing to review papers and they wish to handle a paper.

Editors might ask you to look at a specific aspect of an article, even if the overall topic is outside of your specialist knowledge. They should outline in their invitation to review just what it is they would like you to assess.


What is Plagiarism and Plagiarism Checker? (Link:

Technology has been both a miracle and a curse in terms of plagiarism. No doubt, it has become easier to find the required information and copy it. Since people often do that without attribution, it has also become easier to identify and deal with plagiarism.

Plagiarism definition is actually straightforward. When an author uses someone else’s work without crediting them, it is seen as stealing their intellectual property. Just like theft, the penalties for plagiarized work are also severe all over the world. The real problem is that most people are not even aware of what they are doing.

With the plagiarism detector (Link:, it strives to spread awareness of plagiarism while letting people know how they can prevent it. An author can find countless real-life examples of plagiarism to help you identify it in future.

Why is Plagiarism Checker Important? (Link:

Duplicated content results in a lower page rank. If an author publishes an article or web page content that is not entirely unique and original, there is a significantly higher risk of being blacklisted by Google and other search engines. So, if an author goal is to have a higher page rank- and search engine results placement (SERP)- then it’s simply not worth the risk of publishing heavily duplicated content.

While this free plagiarism checker may be used for checking rewritten or spun content to eliminate consistencies (and raise the unique value of each article) its benefits aren’t restricted to black and gray hat SEO techniques. In fact, white hat SEO specialists rely on this free plagiarism checker to make darn sure their freelance writers are submitting work that is 100% original and unique.

The given free plagiarism software checks sentence one by one on various search engines comparing it with already indexed content. Moreover, the plagiarism detector does not save any content in database. You may sign up for free with this online software (, and we will update you with our latest developments and improvements in the tools through our newsletter.

Other Free Plagiarism Software:










Confidentiality (Do not disclose to others):

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shared or discussed with others unless otherwise authorized by the Editor. Unpublished information or material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Consultation with a single colleague may sometimes be appropriate but you should always discuss this with the Editor beforehand. Most Editors welcome additional comments but whoever else is involved is also obliged to keep the review process confidential. If the review is referred to a student, he or she should communicate directly with the Editor. 

Double Blind Peer Review Process:






Copyrights © Reserved. 2013-14 Nature & Environment

 Website Developed By : Infocyte Solution