Peer Review Policy
Journal of Nuclear Science and Thechnology (Jonsat), uses double-blind peer review to review manuscripts. So that the reviewers do not know the author's identity and vice versa.
- Confidentiality of article information must be observed in all areas. The article review process is to be done anonymously.
- Reviewers should judge articles at the appropriate time and assist the editorial team in deciding whether or not to accept the article.
- The referees' suggestions regarding the published articles should be submitted in the form of judging forms and in the comment section for the author and editor.
- Reviewers should refrain from judging articles with conflict of interest and report any conflict of interest as soon as possible.
- Reviewers' judgments about the quality and content of articles should be based on professional and objective opinions.
- The article is received through the site of the publication.
- The article should be based on the guide on how to write an article.
- Sending article files in the system according to the article submission guide.
- The following files should be uploaded on the journal site (it is necessary to refer to the two guides on how to write an article and submit an article on the main page of the journal / authors / help site to set up and submit the files):
- Original article
- Conflict of interest
- Extended English Abstract
- Profile of authors
- Letter of commitment
2) Peer Review Process (3 to 7 days)
After completing the submission, the code is assigned to the article and the article is placed in the initial review (the duration of the initial review of the article is 3 to 7 days from the date of submission of the article by the author).
3) The Review stage
- After the initial review, it will be sent for judging at any time. At this stage the main file of the article will be sent to three specialized referees without the authors' specifications at the same time. Obviously, if the files are not loaded correctly on the site or need to make structural corrections, it is not possible to send articles to the referee quickly and the article will be returned to the author for initial corrections.
- The reviewing period is about 30 days.
4) The Revision stage
- After the completion of the reviewing, the results will be decided; If the reviewer 'opinion is based on reviewing the article, the comments will be sent to the author. If rejected, the article will be excluded from the reviewer process and the authors will be notified.
- The author is obliged to apply and send the corrections (according to the cases mentioned in the answer form to the judges) within 30 days.
- The amended article is received and reviewed and decided in order to apply the opinion of the judges. If the article is rejected, the author will be notified and if accepted, he/she will go to the next step.
5) The final acceptance stage
- After acceptance, the article will be published (the waiting time for articles in print depends on the number of accepted articles).
- The article will be published online (all articles, after page layout and editing and before publication, are sent to the responsible author to be done if there is a need for correction and change, and finally, the author's approval for publication is obtained).
Notes and Considerations
- Note 1. In all stages of reviewing the article, neither the authors will be informed of the names of the reviewers nor the reviewers will be informed of the names of the authors of the article.
- Note 2. All correspondence with the responsible author is done and only the steps are briefly communicated to other authors. Follow-up of all matters related to the steps and results of judging, time of editing, acceptance and publication of the article is done only by the author in charge of the article. The journal is exempt from responding to other contributing authors.
- Note 3. It is possible for authors to follow the status of the submitted article online through the journal site.
- Note 4. The journal has no obligation to review articles sent to the email addresses of esteemed editorial board members.
- Note 5. In the suggested reviewers section, as much as possible, avoid the suggestions of the esteemed members of the editorial board and the colleagues of the quarterly.