Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to Revue Nature et Technologie are first evaluated by the journal's editor-in-chief or one of the editorial board members. At this stage, manuscripts that are not sufficiently original, have serious scientific weaknesses, are either not properly written or do not correspond to the aims and scope of the journal are automatically rejected, and authors are informed of the decision.
The review policy adopted by the journal is a double-blind evaluation scheme, in which the reviewer and the author remain anonymous throughout the process. They do not belong to the same institution.
Throughout, reviewers are chosen on the basis of their expertise. Our database is constantly updated.
All manuscripts are reviewed as rapidly as possible, while maintaining rigor. Usually a period of two weeks for the reviewers to respond as to their ability to critique a manuscript. When they have responded, they have a further three to six weeks to provide a thorough evaluation of the manuscript.
Reviewers make comments to the author and recommendations to the Editor who then makes the final decision.
Reviewers complete an electronic evaluation grid. Four types of opinion are possible:
- Accept for publication, without modification
- Accept subject to a few modifications
- Propose revision before being considered for publication
- Reject for publication in NATEC.
Common reasons for rejection by reviewers include:
- Incomplete data such as too small a sample size or missing or poor controls
- Poor analysis such as using inappropriate statistical tests or a lack of statistics altogether
- Inappropriate methodology for answering your hypothesis or using old methodology that has been surpassed by newer, more powerful methods that provide more robust results
- Weak research motive where your hypothesis is not clear or scientifically valid, or your data does not answer the question posed. - Inaccurate conclusions on assumptions that are not supported by your data
In the event of one unfavorable and one favorable review, the article undergoes a third anonymous review.
In the case of an unfavorable review and a fairly favorable review proposing modifications before it can be published, the author must revise his article in the proposed modifications; the modified article is then appraised again the same reviewers.
When revision of a manuscript is requested, authors should return the revised version of their manuscript as soon as possible. Prompt action may ensure fast publication if a paper is finally accepted for publication.
Two favorable or very favorable opinions, without requested modifications, lead to publication of the article.
Authors will receive a pdf file with the edited version of their manuscript for final proofreading. This is the last opportunity to view an article before its publication on the journal web site.
Manuscripts accepted for publication are published on-line as soon as they are ready for publication (that is when final proofreading is performed by authors). Once a manuscript appears on the Web site it is considered as published.
The final decision is irrevocable and cannot be contested.
