Abstracts for Peer-Reviewed Journals Draft
Abstract
Peer reviewing the process of including the author’s work, their research, or ideas for other experts in that same field before the paper is published into a book or a journal. The process of peer reviewing and the methodology for writing perfect reviews for the original research paper has been a title to be researched. The editors, reviewers, and authors form an important link in the publication process, and they need to understand their roles and responsibilities shared in the process. This study aims to critique the different methods that the peer reviewers will do in their research process to get effective and perfect feedback on their research. Primary reviews evaluate the research by peers in their fields of specialization. The research will be meant to provide individual peers with an ideal intricate chance to accomplish their needs in their respective arenas. The article will explain why the review process by peers crucial. The research will target the peers interested in being perfect in their fields of specialization and how they will be running their research on any particular field. Therefore, the study will investigate the peer’s altitude towards the peer’s feedback in the process of writing other authors’ work and the guidelines that will be effective for the process of publication. The methodology will include 107 males and 90 females from the University of Science Department at the University of Hebron in 2019/2020. The methods of evaluation will include pre-testing, pre-questionnaires, and post-questionnaires. It will consist of 15 statements following the five-point Likert Scale. The results showed that students show peer feedback as productive exposure. The learners, therefore, enhanced their critical thinking, creativity, confidence, and self-motivation. The research also improved the student’s assignments. The research paper offer recommendations to all students.
Overview
Peer review for pre-publication has been an important part of the field of science. For instance, the first pre-reviewed journal known as Philosophical Transaction was published in 1665, although peer review may be older. For science to be progressive, the research methods and findings need to be carefully examined and verified, and the decision on future research is made. After the study passed through peer review and accepted to be published, the public and scientists are confident that the study has met the required standards, and the results are trustworthy. When the editors have received the manuscript, their first step is to examine it has met the journal’s rules for the format and content. If the manuscript meets the rules, the script is sent to more experts in that same field to give their opinions. The authors-peer reviews- prepares a report the examines the manuscript and sends it back to the previous author. The editor will decide to reject, accept, or ask authors to revise and resubmit the manuscript after the peer’s review report after giving a response to peer review feedback. If the panel resubmits the script, editors can ask for peer reviewers to relook the manuscript, called re-review. Re-review refers to when the author asks the same peer reviewers to look over the manuscript and see if the main concerns have been addressed. There are some of the issues that the peer reviewers may encounter in their manuscripts. They include errors in the method analysis and questions about the findings and making them clearer. Journal editors may propose that the comments and the importance of novelty of the script, and if it raises interest to the audience, are crucial in concluding the manuscript to be published.