What is the peer review process at Frontiers?

Peer review is the cornerstone of scientific publishing. It ensures that your research is evaluated for quality, validity, and integrity before being shared with the wider academic community. We've developed a transparent peer review process that puts quality and community at the heart of your publishing journey.

Our peer review process is designed to be thorough, fair, and efficient. Whether you’re submitting to a Research Topic or a journal, each manuscript undergoes the same rigorous series of quality checks and assessments.

Let's break down the peer review of your paper.

1. Initial validation

When you submit your manuscript to Frontiers, it goes through a pre-screening process conducted by our research integrity team, supported by AIRA (our artificial intelligence review assistant). These initial checks ensure that the manuscript meets our quality standards and adheres to our ethical guidelines. We look for:

• originality and potential plagiarism

• adherence to ethical research practices

• wider patterns of misconduct (such as organizational fraud)

• proper formatting and completeness of the submission.

• If your manuscript passes this initial screening, it moves on to the next stage.

AIRA: streamlining peer review

As an author, AIRA supports our peer review team by identifying and resolving potential issues in your manuscript before and during the peer review process. It assesses language quality, checks figure integrity, and identifies any possible ethical concerns, providing clear and actionable feedback.

This means you can address these areas early, thereby enhancing the quality of your submission and potentially reducing revision time. With AIRA, you’re better equipped to navigate the path to publication, ensuring your research meets the highest standards and is ready for review by specialists in your field.

2. Editorial assignment

A handling editor from the relevant specialty section is invited to oversee the peer review process for your manuscript. This editor, an expert in your field, will conduct a preliminary content check and decide whether to:

• send the manuscript for peer review

• recommend immediate rejection to the specialty chief editor.

If the editor recommends rejection at this stage, the specialty chief editor will review this decision. They may confirm or override the rejection and assign the manuscript to a new handling editor for further assessment. Your manuscript remains in this stage until a reviewer accepts an invitation to review.

Note: Manuscripts are sometimes rejected due to poor language quality or unclear writing, issues that can be addressed before submission. To give your paper the best chance of moving forward, make sure it meets the author guidelines.

3. Independent review

Once reviewers accept the invitation, they have 10 days to submit their independent review reports. Each reviewer evaluates the manuscript using our standardized review template adapted to each article type. This ensures a thorough and consistent review process across all submissions. These reviewers may be:

• invited from our board of review editors

• recruited subject experts from the field.

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on our VALID criteria:

Valid research question and hypothesis.

Applies correct and transparent methodology.

Language and presentation are clear and adequate.

In line with Frontiers' author guidelines and ethical policies.

Determined by a grounding in existing literature.

Upon submitting their report, Reviewers can accept the paper as it is, recommend minor revisions, major revisions, or recommend rejection.

If reviewers recommend rejection, the handling editor will determine the next steps. If they support rejection, our major concerns protocol is activated — you’ll have seven days to submit an optional rebuttal. While this doesn’t guarantee continuation, it offers a fair chance to respond or revise before a final decision is made.

4. Interactive review phase

Once all reviewers have submitted their reports, the handling editor activates the interactive review phase. This unique feature of our peer review process allows authors and reviewers to engage in direct dialogue through our online collaborative review forum.

• Authors can view reviewers' comments and respond directly.

• Reviewers can clarify their points and ask follow-up questions.

• The handling editor moderates the discussion and can invite additional reviewers if needed.

This interactive phase aims to address all concerns about the manuscript efficiently and constructively. Authors typically have 7-14 days to respond and/or submit a revised manuscript, depending on the level of revisions requested. If you require an extension to respond to these comments, these can be approved by your journal’s editorial office.

Note: If you need to resubmit your manuscript, please ensure to provide a point-by-point reply to all reviewer comments, including those who have recommended rejection. If you find the specific Reviewer tab is closed off to a reply, you can respond in the ‘Editor’ tab.

Learn how to resubmit your article

Is the review phase single or double anonymized?

We operate a single-anonymized review model to uphold the quality and integrity of the process. This means reviewers can see the authors’ names. It allows them to provide a more informed assessment by considering the research in its full context. It also helps reviewers identify potential conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation to review.

We publicly acknowledge all endorsing reviewers for their contributions once an article is published. This approach ensures trust, reduces bias, and highlights the collaborative effort behind every published article.

6. Review finalized

At this stage, the handling editor reviews your paper to ensure it meets the journal’s standards.

• Reviewers can recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection at any time.

• The handling editor can choose to accept the manuscript once the minimum number of endorsements is met.

• The handling editor can recommend rejection to the specialty chief editor

  The specialty chief editor makes the final decision on rejection.

It's important to note that Frontiers has no target rejection rate. Our focus is on publishing all valid research that meets our quality standards.

7. Final validation

This is the last step before publication. Our peer review specialists and the journal's chief editors conduct a final assessment to confirm that everything meets our standards for quality and accuracy.

As the leading authorities in their fields, the chief editors ensure that each manuscript aligns with our high standards and makes a meaningful contribution to our community, thereby enhancing the reputation for excellence and trust of our journals.

8. Publication

Once your manuscript has passed final validation and you have paid the article publishing charge (APC), it will be passed to our production team.

Learn more about the production process

Several features set our peer review process apart:

Transparency

We operate a single anonymized process. The names of handling editors and reviewers are published on the final articles, promoting accountability and recognition for their contributions.

Collaboration

Our constructive review phase is unique in publishing. It fosters a direct dialogue among authors, reviewers, and editors, resulting in more efficient manuscript improvement.

Timeliness

Thanks to our streamlined process and support teams, our average review time is under 90 days, with many journals and sections completing reviews in significantly less time.

Objectivity

We prioritize validity and quality over perceived impact, and we don’t set arbitrary rejection rates. Instead, we support the principles of open science, ensuring that all credible research is accessible.

Rigorous quality control

We have the largest research integrity team in the publishing industry, dedicated to protecting our communities and safeguarding the scientific record. Our multi-layered approach, including editorial checks, peer review, and final validation, ensures the highest standards throughout the process.

Support for reviewers

To make sure the right people evaluate your paper, we've developed Frontiers Discover. This platform enables review editors to browse submitted manuscripts and volunteer to review those that match their expertise.