Some very bad examples clutter the history of science. In the late 18 th century, about when oxygen was discovered, Priestley in England and Lavosier in France each controlled a major journal, and were bitter opponents who suppressed disfavored papers. Phrenology, which measured the skull to detemine mental processes, was widely taught. In the early 20 th century, papers promoting Eugenics were welcome in journals of the social sciences. The geological theory of Plate Tectonics was ridiculed and dismissed from the 1920s to the 1960s. A more recent horrible example is the way the opioid medicine Oxycontin got approved and accepted in the medical community, only being discovered to be highly addictive through very adverse experience.
All journals are subjected to a single-blind peer review process. The peer-review process is done by esteemed reviewers with an in-depth knowledge of the specialized discipline and purpose of the process. In order to encourage maximum participation from part of the reviewers, scientific credits will be provided based on the number of manuscripts handled and the exemplary timelines by the authors.
The tracking system will be used for peer-review of scientific journals to meet the criteria of an international editorial manager system. This provides greater flexibility and degree of transparency at each level, with respect to the authors, editors, and reviewers respectively. The standard peer review process is also essential from the perspective of editorial board members, who takes the responsibility in shaping the open access articles to meet the international standards of open access journals.
Peer-reviewed articles are assessed and critiqued by the scientists and experts in the same field after the article is distributed for review. An author is expected to incorporate the suggested changes prior to publication. This process enriches the content and improves the quality of the presentation considerably.