All papers that are published in FACETS undergo rigorous peer review except for editorial and introductory material that is clearly marked as such.
Criteria for Publication
Research published in FACETS must conform to ethical standards of experimentation and research integrity. Manuscript acceptance is based on the technical validity or soundness of the work as well as evidence of advancing knowledge.
Submission, peer review, and publication processes
Submission
Manuscripts must be submitted via ScholarOne Manuscripts, the journal online submission and peer review system. Technical support for peer reviewers can be found online or by contacting the journal’s editorial office.
Screening
All original manuscript submissions are evaluated by one of the FACETS editors-in-chief. At this initial screening, editors-in-chief focus on appraising suitability for the journal. Manuscripts that are within journal scope and meet its basic scientific standards are, in most cases, assigned to a Senior Editor (regular submissions) or Guest Editor (submissions to a Collection). The Senior or Guest Editor will assess the manuscript for the quality of the science. Manuscripts of interest that are methodologically sound will then be assigned to a Subject Editor for peer review.
Peer review
Subject Editors (also called handling editors) are responsible for seeking advice from a minimum of two (2) reviewers before making a recommendation to the Senior or Guest Editor. FACETS uses single-anonymous peer review: reviewers (called referees herein) remain anonymous to the authors unless they voluntarily self-identify.
Referees may be drawn from the journal’s user database in ScholarOne, the journals’ editorial board, the wider research community, or author recommendations. During submission, authors are asked to list suggested (required) and non-preferred (optional) referees, though editors are not obliged to use, or avoid, those referees. Referees are selected for their knowledge of, and their experience in, the subject treated in the manuscript.
Referees are asked to complete their reports in a timely manner, maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts they handle, and ensure their review comments are well supported and written in a respectful, professional manner that is free of prejudice, including gender and racial stereotyping. Referee reports should help authors improve their work (regardless of the editorial decision), and help editors decide whether to publish an article. See our instructions for reviewers for more information on FACETS peer review standards.
A note about conflicts of interest: Reviewers and Editors are expected to recuse themselves from the evaluation of papers in which they may have a real or perceived conflict of interest. Conflicts of interest may include financial interests in any aspect of a product or method under discussion, personal relationships (positive or negative) with authors, interest in competing research, or bias concerning the research.
A note about author-suggested referees: At original submission, the submitting author must list two (2) potential referees for their manuscripts: referee first and last names, and their current email addresses, will be required. Qualified and eligible reviewers include other researchers in the field who are not in direct or indirect conflict of interest with the submitted manuscript. Please also consider naming international experts in the list. Recall that editors are under no obligation to use author-suggested referees.
Decisions
The Senior Editor or Guest Editor, under the supervision of the Editors-in-Chief, retains full responsibility for all decisions regarding the manuscript. Referee and editor comments are included in decision letters, which are sent to all authors. Referees are informed of the decision and provided with the comments from their co-referees. Anonymity is preserved unless a referee has elected to sign their comments to the authors, in which case both authors and co-referees will see their name.
Revisions
At revision, we ask that authors respond to all referee and editor comments and format their revised article according to journal style (see Instructions to Authors). Authors are given a specific timeframe for revisions. Requests for extensions should be made by email to the journal editorial office, and should include reasons for the extension. Unless there is a risk of data becoming outdated, extension requests are usually granted. Manuscripts that go over their revision deadline, and whose authors do not respond to journal editorial office queries, are withdrawn.
Peer review information that is published after acceptance
Accepted articles are published with their peer review history dates: date of submission date, date of acceptance, date of online publication, and the date of any corrections, if applicable. The names of editors who accepted the article (Senior or Guest Editor) and handled peer review (Subject Editor) are also published with the article.