Peer Review Process and Policy
Article submission to the Institute for Environmental Nanotechnology (IENT) is primarily handled through an online submission system; however, submissions via email may occasionally be accepted. The entire peer-review process is conducted digitally.
IENT follows a systematic double-blind peer-review process in which the identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review.
Review Procedure
- Initial Screening: After plagiarism screening, the Editor-in-Chief (EiC) examines the manuscript for clarity, language quality, and overall readability. Manuscripts with major deficiencies may be returned for revision.
- Editorial Assessment: The EiC consults Editorial Board members to evaluate the scientific merit of the manuscript and its relevance to a broad scholarly readership.
- External Peer Review: Upon preliminary approval, the manuscript is sent to two external reviewers with relevant expertise for double-blind peer review.
- Reviewer Recommendations: Reviewers submit detailed reports with recommendations to accept, reject, or request minor or major revisions.
- Author Revision: Consolidated reviewer comments, approved by the EIC, are communicated to the corresponding author for revision, if required.
- Final Evaluation: Revised manuscripts are reassessed by the EIC based on reviewer feedback and editorial standards.
Post-Acceptance Process
Accepted manuscripts are forwarded to Copyeditors for final language editing and formatting. A concluding editorial assessment is conducted before approving the galley proof for publication.
The final decision to publish the galley rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief.
Ethical Considerations
If a member of the Editorial Board is an author of a submitted manuscript or has a potential conflict of interest, an alternative editor will be assigned to oversee the review process. This ensures transparency, impartiality, and adherence to the highest ethical standards.