Journal of Mountain Research

Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Mountain Research operates a double-blind peer-review procedure. Authors should anonymize elements within the manuscript that could reveal their identities, such as authors' names, institutional affiliations, contact information, and references to their own work.

• Upon receipt of a manuscript, it undergoes an initial assessment by the editorial team to evaluate its suitability for publication as per the Journal Guidelines.
• If necessary, it is also forwarded to a subject-specific referee or reviewer for expert review.
• If found appropriate, the manuscript is typically sent to at least two independent reviewers for expert evaluation of its scientific quality.
• The author is informed of comments and is requested to revise the manuscript accordingly.
• After revision, the manuscript is reviewed by the Chief Editor for final decision.
• Reviewer identities remain confidential.
• Final acceptance or rejection is decided by the Chief Editor.

Peer review ensures academic quality through constructive feedback on methodology, findings, discussion, and presentation.

Review process duration: 3–6 months depending on revisions and feedback.

Competing Interests

Reviewers must disclose any competing interests and withdraw if bias is possible.

Confidentiality

All manuscript content must remain confidential and not be shared or used personally.

Timeliness

Reviewers should submit reports on time or request extensions if needed.

Peer Review Flow Chart