Journal of Inorganic and Organometallic Polymers and Materials - Editorial Procedure

This journal follows a single-anonymized reviewing procedure.

Additional information

This journal is guided by the Springer Portfolio editorial peer review policy (this opens in a new tab).

The following types of contribution to this journal are peer-reviewed: Research Papers, Brief Reports and Reviews.

Correspondence and all forms of published correction may also be peer-reviewed at the discretion of the editors. Other contributed articles are not usually peer-reviewed. Nevertheless, articles published in these sections, particularly if they present technical information, may be peer-reviewed at the discretion of the editors.

Every submitted paper is first assessed by the Editors with respect to its scientific content and in particular in terms of its novelty in line with the aims and scope of the journal. The corresponding author is notified by e-mail when the editor decides not to send a paper for review. Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to two or three reviewers. Reviewer selection is critical to the publication process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, and our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics. When selecting reviewers, we seek to avoid conflicts of interest and close associates of the authors. Springer Nature is committed to diversity, equity and inclusion; Springer journals strive for diverse demographic representation of peer reviewers.

This journal operates a single-anonymized peer review process (this opens in a new tab). In line with policy, referees are not identified to the authors, except at the request of the referee.

This journal requires potential referees to disclose any professional and commercial competing interests before undertaking to review a paper, and requires referees not to copy papers or to circulate them to un-named colleagues. All referees agree to these conditions before the journal sends them a manuscript to assess. Although our Editors go to every effort to ensure manuscripts are assessed fairly, the journal is not responsible for the conduct of its referees.

The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice, from among several possibilities: (a) Accept, with or without editorial revisions (b) Invite the authors to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before a final decision is reached (c) Reject, but indicate to the authors if further work might justify a resubmission (d) Reject outright, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.

The peer review of any submissions for which the Editor has a competing interest is handled by another Editor who has no competing interests, to ensure that the evaluation of these submissions is completely objective.

Special Issue

Special Issues follow the standard peer review policy. The peer review process of any submission associated with a special issue is handled by a dedicated guest editor who is responsible for assigning at least two referees to each article and evaluating the reviews. Each special issue has a responsible regular editor to whom the guest editor recommends final decision. All final decisions (accept/ reject) are made by a regular editor after evaluating the reports, manuscript and recommendation.