Peer Review
1 Basic Principles
Petroleum Science Bulletin employs a double-blind peer review system to ensure fairness, objectivity, and rigor in the evaluation process. The key principles are as follows:
1）Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to avoid potential bias.
2）Manuscripts are assessed based on scientific validity, originality, and academic significance.
3）The editorial office, reviewers, and authors must maintain confidentiality regarding the review process and content.
2 Review Process
1）Initial Review (Editorial Office, within 1 week)
Editors will examine whether the manuscript complies with the journal's scope, formatting requirements, and academic ethics standards while conducting a preliminary assessment of its academic quality. Manuscripts failing to meet formatting specifications will be returned for revision, whereas those outside the journal's scope, containing ethical violations, or demonstrating poor academic quality will be either rejected outright or recommended for submission to alternative publications.
2）Peer Review (Double-blind, 2~8 weeks)
* Manuscripts passing initial review are sent to 3~5 experts in the field. Reviewers with conflicts of interest (e.g., collaboration, mentorship, or financial ties) should declare recusal.
* Reviewers shall evaluate the manuscript based on originality (whether the research proposes new methods, perspectives or conclusions), scientific rigor (rationality of experimental design, data analysis and argumentation), practical value (theoretical or applied significance to petroleum science), and writing quality (logical clarity, language standardization, and compliance with figure/table requirements), and provide detailed review comments accordingly.
* The standard review period is generally 2 weeks upon receipt of the manuscript. Should the review exceed this timeframe, the editorial office will issue a reminder or appoint an alternative reviewer.
3）Editorial Decision
* Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication when two or more reviewers approve it without requiring revisions.
* Accept with minor revisions: The manuscript requires revisions based on reviewers' comments. Authors shall submit the revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response to each comment within two weeks.
* Re-review: When reviewers request modifications, authors must submit both the revised manuscript and a point-by-point response to all comments within two weeks. The revised version will be re-evaluated by the original reviewers.
* Reject: If reviewers identify fundamental flaws in the paper, the editorial office will notify the author after consolidating all review opinions.
4）Final Decision (by Editor-in-Chief/Editorial Board)
The revised manuscript undergoes final review by the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board. Upon confirmation of compliance with all requirements, it will be scheduled for publication.
3 Authors' Rights and Responsibilities
1）If authors disagree with the review decision, they may submit a written appeal for reconsideration within 10 working days. The editorial office will then refer the matter to the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board for re-evaluation, with a final decision to be rendered and communicated to the corresponding author within 30 working days.
2）Authors must formally declare that the submitted manuscript represents original work free from any academic misconduct including but not limited to plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate submission, redundant publication, improper authorship attribution, or violations of research ethics, and contains no content that contravenes laws and regulations, confidentiality requirements, or infringes upon others' rights. Should any academic misconduct be identified, the journal will reject the manuscript, with serious cases resulting in blacklisting and notification to relevant institutions; detailed criteria for determining misconduct and corresponding handling procedures are available on the journal's official website.
Pubdate: 2025-07-01
Viewed:
204
Author Login
Peer Review
Office Work
Editor-in-Chief