Peer Review

Review processes

Scientific contributions are subject to a first internal reviewing process as well as a following formalized external double-blind peer review process.

All other texts are subject to an internal reviewing and editing process, but they are only partially reviewed externally, only in need of clarification.

The peer review process

Before starting the peer review process all contributions undergo an examination and internal reviewing process by at least two members of the editorial team or advisory board, which leads to a preliminary evaluation of the contents. Feedback is given, enquiries are made and uncertainties are settled, so that a first editing can be made. A central point at this stage is the question of interdisciplinary comprehensiveness of the contributions particularly of the scientific contributions. Not explicitly scientifically oriented contributions afterwards pass on to the editorial process.

Scientific contributions are then anonymized in the further process and are passed on in an edited version to a reviewing process (peer review) with external referees and are evaluated according to the content. Normally only one person competent in the subject and discipline is called in, since most contributions have been examined and evaluated by several persons before.

For the peer review a formalized review sheet is used that allows to assess aspects of the evaluation on the subject and the worthiness to be published on a rating scale as well as invites to include critical objections, to make suggestions for changes if appropriate or to indicate that further subject relevant aspects ought to be taken into consideration.

The revising should be done within a period of time of not more than three weeks and should contain a statement on approval or disapproval of the contribution. In case of an approval this might be without conditions or smaller or larger changes may be recommended.

The contributors are informed about the result of the peer review by editorial staff. Changes and corrections should be made within a period of time of three weeks. The result of the revising is compared by editorial staff with the details given in the peer review. Then the editorial team decides on acceptance or rejection of the contribution.