Principles of Reviewers
Appointed reviewers are expected to evaluate submitted manuscripts objectively and fairly, and to make recommendations regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection based on the journal's Editorial Policy and the criteria described below. Reviewers should consider the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of the manuscript to the scope of CHROMATOGRAPHY.
Peer-review Process
1. Assignment of Handling Editor
The Editor-in-Chief assigns a handling editor for each submitted manuscript. In some cases, the Editor-in-Chief may serve as the handling editor. For manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, the handling editor is appointed by an Associate Editors-in-Chief to avoid any conflict of interest. 2. Initial Editorial Screening
All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the assigned handling editor, who is an Associate Editor or a member of the Editorial Board. During this stage, the manuscript is evaluated for compliance with journal formatting requirements, length, and appropriateness for the selected article category and the scope of the journal. 3. Selection of Reviewers
The handling editor selects appropriate independent reviewer(s) with expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript. 4. Number and Anonymity of Reviewers
In principle, all manuscripts are reviewed by a minimum of two reviewers. Manuscripts classified as Focusing Reviews may be reviewed by one reviewer. CHROMATOGRAPHY employs a single-blind peer-review process: reviewers remain anonymous to authors, while reviewers are aware of the authors' identities. Reviewer identities are disclosed only to the Editorial Board to ensure fairness and objectivity.
Review Criteria
Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
Originality and novelty: Whether the research presents original ideas, methods, or findings that advance the field.
Scientific soundness and logical consistency: Whether the study design, analysis, and conclusions are logically consistent and scientifically valid.
Technical quality: Appropriateness and rigor of experimental methods, data analysis, and statistical treatment.
Significance and usefulness: The extent to which the work contributes to the development and application of separation and detection science.
Presentation and clarity: Organization, readability, and clarity of figures, tables, and text.
Suitability for the journal: Relevance to the aims and scope of CHROMATOGRAPHY and interest to the journal's readership.
Quality of English: Whether the manuscript is written in clear and understandable English.
Reviewer Reports
Reviewers are requested to submit their reports using the prescribed review form and to select one of the following recommendations:
Accept without revision
Accept after minor revision
Reconsider after major revision
Reject
Reviewers should provide clear, constructive, and specific comments to support their recommendation.
Reviewers are expected to submit their review report within two weeks after accepting the review invitation. If a report is not received within this period, or if the reviewer does not respond to editorial correspondence, the review request may be cancelled and an alternative reviewer may be appointed.
Editorial Decision and Author Notification
Based on the reviewers' reports and the handling editor's assessment, the Editor-in-Chief will make one of the following decisions and notify the author(s):
Accept
Major revision required
Minor revision required
Reject
When revision is requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response to reviewers' comments within the following time limits:
Original Papers: 8 weeks
Short Communications, Reviews, Mini Reviews, Technical Notes, and others: 4 weeks
Author Rebuttal and Appeals
If authors disagree with reviewers' comments or editorial decisions, they may submit a reasoned rebuttal. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief may establish an independent review committee to evaluate whether the appeal is justified. The outcome of this evaluation and the rationale for the decision will be communicated to the author(s).
Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct
Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and must not disclose, discuss, or use any information contained in a manuscript prior to publication. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the journal's publication ethics policies and the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
