Review Policy
🔬 Core Peer Review System
Journal BiNET utilises a single-blind peer-review system, with an editor further reviewing the manuscript. The primary goal of this setup is to provide authors with constructive feedback to improve their manuscripts while helping editors make informed, unbiased publication decisions.
⏱️ Timeline & Speed
Promptness: Reviewers are expected to complete and return their evaluated manuscripts within a few weeks.
Commitment: Before accepting an assignment, reviewers must ensure they have the expertise and the availability to complete it promptly to prevent editorial delays.
📋 The Step-by-Step Evaluation Process
Initial Assessment: An original manuscript is first checked by the editorial team to ensure it meets the minimum guidelines for manuscript preparation.
Assignment: Once it passes the initial check, the paper is assigned an article ID and emailed to one potential reviewer specialising in the relevant field.
Review Execution: Reviewers critique the paper, preferably using Microsoft Word’s "Track Changes" feature. Alternatively, they can provide feedback using a dedicated Reviewer Comments Form sent to them as an email attachment.
Final Decision: The reviewed manuscript is sent back to the editor, who further reviews and provides consolidated feedback for authors. Based on the reports, it will either be accepted with minor corrections, sent back to the author for a deeper revision, or rejected. (Note: If an author resubmits a major revision, the review process starts over with the original reviewers.)
Publication: Once officially accepted, the text goes through final formatting and is published as an online version on the website.
🧠 Reviewer Responsibilities & Standards
Journal BiNET aligns its ethical practices with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Key expectations include the following:
Fairness & Objectivity: Reviews must be honest and completely uninfluenced by the paper's origin, subject matter, or the author's commercial, political, cultural, gender, racial, or institutional background.
Tone & Tone Control: Editors and reviewers must strictly avoid personal attacks or demoralising language. The critique should explicitly highlight the paper's strengths while framing weaknesses alongside constructive suggestions for improvement.
Conflict of Interest (COI): A COI exists if an author, reviewer, or editor has competing interests that could cloud academic honesty or cause bias. If a reviewer identifies a conflict, they must decline the review.
Confidentiality: The entire process is strictly confidential to protect the integrity of the research before publication.
📥 Evaluation Criteria & Recommendations
When evaluating a paper, reviewers specifically look at the following:
Originality and overall contribution to the field.
Technical quality and data analysis.
Clarity of presentation and research depth.
The final recommendation from a reviewer must be one of the following:
Accept as it is.
Requires minor corrections.
Requires moderate revision.
Requires major revision.
Not suitable for the journal (with a suggestion to submit to a more appropriate publication).
Reject.
Editorial & Publication Policies
🔍Peer Review Policy
Single-Blind Review: All submitted manuscripts undergo a single-blind peer-review process, meaning both the author and the reviewers remain completely anonymous to one another.
Quality Control: Editors assign at least one independent reviewer with a matching background to evaluate the technical quality, data analysis, originality, and depth of the research.
Reviewer Decisions: Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommendations regarding the manuscript.
🚫 Originality, Plagiarism, and Academic Misconduct
Original Material Only: Submitted papers must consist of entirely original data. The manuscript (or any significant portion of it) must not be under consideration, in processing, or published anywhere else.
Similarity Checks: The editorial office runs all submissions through iThenticate to check for potential plagiarism. High similarity indexes will result in immediate rejection.
🤝 Authorship and Affiliations
Author Contribution: Everyone listed as an author must have made substantial contributions to the research design, data collection, analysis, or drafting of the manuscript.
Making Changes: Rearranging, adding, or deleting authors is permitted only before final acceptance. It requires a formal letter or email to the editor signed by all original authors explaining the reasoning.
⚖️ Conflicts of Interest & Disclosures
Transparency: Authors must explicitly declare all funding sources (grants, university funds, project sponsors) within the manuscript.
Biases: Any potential competing interests—whether financial, professional, or personal—that could influence or be perceived to influence the research interpretation must be openly disclosed.
🔓 Open Access Model & Processing Fees
Unrestricted Access: The journals operate under a full Open Access (OA) model. Once published, anyone can read, share, print, or download the full-text PDF completely free of charge.
Creative Commons: Content is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows for building upon the work provided proper attribution is given.
APF / APC: Because access is free to the public, authors pay a nominal Article Processing Fee (APF) to cover the costs of digital hosting, DOI registration via CrossRef, and long-term maintenance.
📝 Copyright and Liability
Retained Rights: Authors retain the core publishing rights and copyrights to their work while granting Journal BiNET the necessary transfer rights for publication and ongoing digital developments.
Content Liability: The author(s) alone hold full responsibility and liability for the facts, data accuracy, and opinions expressed within their published articles. The editorial board and journal authority bear no liability for the content.
Note to Authors: The above review and editorial aspects may change without any notice.