- Open Submissions
- Peer Reviewed
- Open Submissions
- Peer Reviewed
- Open Submissions
- Peer Reviewed
- Open Submissions
- Peer Reviewed
Peer Review Process
What is Peer Review?
Peer review is a central part of publishing quality articles. The purpose of peer reviewing is to have reviewers help a submitted article become stronger by evaluating its quality and relevance to the field, and providing suggestions and advice to authors. Reviewer ethics and responsibilities are posted in our Editorial Policies page.
FFS’s Peer Review Process
Functional Foods Science has a single blind closed review process. Single blind review means that the author is unaware of the reviewer’s identity. This process helps reviewers make impartial decisions and give better criticism to the author, because the reviewer will not be unnecessarily influenced by the author. Closed review means that the reviewers will remain anonymous and the pre-publication history will not be made available.
Submission of a manuscript is first reviewed by a Chief Editor. If the manuscript meets all the basic requirements, the manuscript will be assigned two peer reviewers. The review process takes approximately 2-4 weeks. The reviewers will evaluate the manuscript based on its ability to serve the scientific community, its relevance to the journal, its originality, its technical aspects (such as formatting), as well as its coherence and understandability.
After analysis by reviewers it will be returned to the Chief Editor for last detail checks such as grammar and language, and then sent to the author for revisions. Several correspondences between author, editor-in-chief, and reviewers occur before final manuscript is ready. After all necessary revisions have been made and publication fees have been paid, the manuscript is published. All decisions are ultimately made by Editors-in-Chief and are whom any appeals against rejection should be addressed to.
Authors may suggest peer reviewers via their submission’s cover letter if they wish, however, decisions about whether or not to invite the suggested reviewer(s) is ultimately up to the Editor-in-Chief. Suggested reviewers should not be people whom the author(s) have recently collaborated with or currently work with as colleagues in the same institution. All suggested peer reviewers should have contact information included.
A request for exclusion of certain individuals as peer reviewers is also acceptable, but an explanation must be provided via the submission’s cover letter. Extensive listing of individuals is not acceptable as it may impede the peer review process.
Any intentionally false information (i.e. false reviewer names and/or e-mail addresses) will result in immediate rejection of the manuscript.
Authors wishing to submit a manuscript should also read over all the Editorial Policies under the link “About the Journal”.
Open Access Policy
Our journal provides immediate open access for our content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The Journal of Functional Foods Science (FFS) considers publication ethics to be of the utmost importance. In order to uphold the scientific integrity of our journal, we are committed to maintaining high standards of honesty and accuracy in each and every one of our publications. Unethical practices such as plagiarism and falsification of data are not tolerated.
We have outlined below the duties and responsibilities of each major party in the publication process including: editors, authors, and reviewers. This statement was based on the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement by the Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
"Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement." AACE. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 2013. Web. 27 May 2015.
- Publication Decisions: After reading comments by the editorial review board, the editor may accept, reject, or suggest changes to the manuscript.
- Review of Manuscripts: He/she must perform an initial review of the manuscript in order to check for originality. Then, the editor should send the manuscript in blind peer review form to the editorial board, who at this point, may accept, reject, or suggest changes to the manuscript.
- Unbiased Review: The editor must review manuscripts based solely on intellectual and scientific content, and not be swayed by authors
- Confidentiality: Prior to publication, manuscripts and related information must be kept confidential.
- Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: FFHD editors may not publish and/or submit manuscript material as his or her own work without the author(s)’ written consent.
- Reporting Standards: Author’s manuscripts should be an accurate account of their research methods, results, followed by an objective empirical discussion. Manuscripts should follow the guidelines dictated on the FFS website: https://ffhdj.com/index.php/FunctionalFoodScience
- Originality: Authors must take care to describe only their original work in their manuscripts.
- Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Authors should not submit identical manuscripts or descriptions of the same research to more than one journal simultaneously.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge and/or cite all sources that contributed to the manuscript, influenced its research, or helped with its completion.
- Authorship: Individuals should be named authors only if they made significant contributions to manuscript conception, design, completion, or analysis. Other significant contributors must be named as co-authors.
- Data Access and Retention: Authors should provide original data to FFS as well as keep copies of this data for reference.
- Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author(s) discovers a significant error in their submitted manuscript, he/she must report the error to the FFS editor.
- Confidentiality: Reviewers must keep all manuscript information confidential prior to publication.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should ensure that authors acknowledge all relevant sources used in the study. If reviewers notice suspicious similarity of information between current or prior manuscripts, it must be reported to FFS’s editor.
- Objectivity: Manuscript feedback should be scientifically objective, without bias, clear, and supported by arguments.
- Promptness: If a reviewer believes that he/she will not be able to thoroughly read a manuscript within the required time frame, he/she must reported this to the FFS's editor so that the editor can find a replacement reviewer.
Human and Animal Rights
When submitting a manuscript to our journal, all authors are expected to have read and agreed to all our author’s guidelines. In particular, any experimental research reported in the manuscript should have been performed with the approval of an appropriate ethics committee. Research carried out on humans must be in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration. Any experimental research on animals must follow internationally recognized guidelines.
A statement to this effect must be included in the Methods section of the manuscript. This statement should include the name of the body which gave approval, with a reference number where appropriate. Informed consent must also be documented. A manuscript may be rejected if the editorial office considers that the research has not been carried out within an ethical framework. For example, if the severity of the experimental procedure is not justified by the value of the knowledge gained.
Our official Conflict of Interest or Competing Interests policy is defined as the following. A competing interest exists when your interpretation or presentation of information may be influenced by personal or financial interests with other people or organizations. Accordingly, authors should disclose any personal or financial interests that may influence their scientific judgment and the manuscript. Conflicts of interest will undermine the credibility of the authors, the journal, and the research they are trying to present.
Withdrawal, Cancellation and Late Payment Policy
If the author withdraws their article within the first week of submission, there is no cancellation fee. However, if an author still desires to withdraw their article after the initial stage of submission, there will be a cancellation fee of 50% of the article publication fee. If the author withdraws after the peer review process has concluded and we have sent the general article acceptance letter, they will have to pay the full article publication fee.
Once the corresponding author receives the final galley proof of their article with page numbers, the article cannot be withdrawn. There also should be no more significant changes or edits to the content of the manuscript.
If we do not receive payment for the article and the article has not been withdrawn, a late fee will be added on top of the publication fee. The late fee amount depends on the length of time in which we do not receive a payment.
If we provide the authors with the reviewer’s comments but do not receive the final draft or any reply, then we may publish the article as is (following editing and formatting to fit our journal guidelines). Further action will be taken if the article has been published and we still do not receive payment. We will send the authors reminder emails and the details of the steps we are taking throughout this entire process to ensure that they have multiple chances of rectifying the situation. As a peer-reviewed, open access journal, we are supported by the funds provided by publishing authors. These funds are necessary to allow us to continue publishing excellent articles as well as providing discounts to authors from developing countries.
Digital Archiving Policy
The FFS journal uses the Public Knowledge Preservation Network (PKP PN) as our digital archiving policy.
The PKP PN digitally preserves OJS jounrals. The PKP PN ensures that journals can be preserved using the LOCKSS program, which offers decentralized and distributed preservation, continual open access, and preservation of original content. For more details, visit the following link.
FFS Copyright Policy