Peer review is a crucial part of the publication process for academic journals. The editorial office engages experts in the relevant field to evaluate manuscripts, determining whether they should be accepted, in order to ensure the journal’s academic quality. The Editorial Office of Xinjiang Petroleum Geology implements a three-stage review system, consisting of an initial review by the handling editor, a peer review by experts from this discipline, and a final review by the Editor-in-Chief. Before manuscripts are sent for review, all information identifying the authors, their affiliations, and funding sources is removed, so that all stages of the review process are conducted under a double-blind system. The details are as follows:
I. Review Process
1 Initial Review
The editor evaluates the manuscript based on the overall topic, academic quality, and other general aspects. Manuscripts that meet the journal’s requirements proceed to the peer review stage; otherwise, they are rejected.
2 Expert Peer Review
The manuscript is assessed for specific aspects such as originality, academic quality, and rigor. Two experts from this discipline shall review the manuscript and provide comments for the authors’ reference.
3 Final Review
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on acceptance, rejection, or revision based on the peer reviewers’ comments. Manuscripts with disputed evaluations are submitted to the editorial board for discussion, and a final decision is made according to the specific review feedback.
II. Review Principle
1. Is the manuscript suitable for XPG? Is it original and important?
The topic should be within the scope of the journal and should be of interest to the readers. Reviewers also need to judge the originality and importance of the manuscript.
2. Are the results and conclusions well-supported?
Reviewers should point out if the data are incomplete, insufficient, or if there are errors, because the data may fail to lead to the results and thus the conclusions.
3. Are there any problems regarding statistics?
The statistics reviewer needs to make sure there are no flaws or errors regarding statistical methods and analyses.
4. Confidentiality
Reviewers should respect and observe the confidentiality of the manuscript.
III. Editorial Policy
1. Authors must respond to each of the reviewers' comments point by point and submit a revised version of the manuscript. If the revised manuscript is not returned within the specified time, it will be considered automatically withdrawn.
2. Manuscripts submitted by editorial board members and editors must also strictly adhere to the entire review procedures of the journal. The review of these manuscripts will be conducted independently from the editorial board members, editors, and their research teams. Editorial board members and editors must avoid participating in the review of manuscripts authored by individuals with whom they have competition, collaboration, or other conflicts of interest.
3. The review process for supplementary issues, special issues and special columns follows the same procedure as the regular articles, including identical review and editorial processes, with the Editor-in-Chief making the final acceptance decision. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the content of the entire journal. The journal may invite authoritative experts in the field to serve as Guest Editors, responsible for selecting topic, inviting contribution, and taking peer review under the supervision of the Editor-in-Chief to ensure fairness in the review process.
4. Authors who disagree with editorial or peer review decisions may submit an appeal. The author must prepare a written request indicating the manuscript number and providing detailed reasons for the appeal, and it must be stamped by the author’s affiliated institution to be valid. The editorial office will decide whether to accept the appeal based on the specific circumstances. If authors experience any unfair treatment during the submission and review process, or encounter situations in which journal staff clearly violate publication ethics, they may submit complaints or suggestions via email to the journal. Upon receipt, the editorial office will handle the matter promptly and provide feedback as appropriate. The journal encourages readers and authors to mutually supervise and actively provide relevant information to help foster a positive academic environment. Appeals, complaints, and suggestions should be sent to the journal’s email: xjsydz@vip.163.com.
