Peer Review Process

The eligibility of manuscripts for publication in Marine Fisheries: Journal of Marine Fisheries Technology and Management (MARFISH) is assessed by the reviewers and the MARFISH Editorial Board. The review process is conducted by double-blind review. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision whether the manuscript is recommended to be accepted, rejected, or returned to the author for revision.

  1. When submitting a manuscript, authors must fulfil the conditions set by MARFISH related to Aims and Scope and Publications Ethics. Along with the manuscript, the author must also attach the Author Agreement Declaration. Author must also follow the manuscript format specified by MARFISH (Author Guidelines/Manuscript template).
  2. After the manuscript passes the administrative selection, the editor will check the similarity using Turnitin software. If the similarity reaches more than 25%, the manuscript will be rejected.
  3. Once the manuscript passes the similarity check, the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor will evaluate the manuscript through a pre-qualification review to determine suitability for further review.
  4. At this stage, the manuscript can be rejected without a review process, for three general reasons:
  • The topic of the manuscript does not fit the scope of MARFISH and may be more suitable for publication elsewhere.
  • The substance of the manuscript does not meet MARFISH standards; the data used is incomplete; the methodology used is not appropriate; there is no novelty and no development of existing knowledge; or there is no consistency between the objectives, research design/methods, evidence, and conclusions.
  • Manuscripts are not written following the MARFISH guidelines mentioned in the Author Guidelines.
  1. Once the manuscript meets the prequalification requirements, it will be sent to two qualified Reviewers selected by the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor.
  2. The reviewing partners should review the manuscript and return it with their recommendations, comments, and suggestions to the Editor-in-Chief within 2 weeks of receiving the review request. If one of the Reviewer recommends rejection, and conversely, another Reviewer recommends revision, then the Editor-in-Chief will ask the third Reviewer or the Board of Editors to decide on the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.
  3. Manuscripts that need to be revised will be returned to the author, and the author must return the revised manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief via OJS MARFISH within 7 working days from the notification/email from the Editor-in-Chief if received. Authors can request an extension of time to the Editor-in-Chief before the revision deadline expires. If within two times the predetermined time limit, the author still does not respond, the Editor-in-Chief can stop the publication process or the manuscript is given a "Rejected" status.
  4. For manuscripts that request revision checking by a Reveiwers, the revised manuscript will be sent to the reveiwers upon request. At this stage, the Reviewers should review the revised manuscript and return it with their recommendations, comments, and suggestions to the Editor-in-Chief within 2 weeks of receiving the review request.
  5. Next, the Editor-in-Chief will send the revised manuscript to the Associate Editor to check whether the manuscript has been revised in accordance with the suggestions of the Reviewers.
  6. The Associate Editor may make a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief that the manuscript should be returned to the author, accepted, or rejected within 2 weeks.
  7. At this stage, the manuscript can be rejected if the author does not revise the manuscript according to the suggestions of the Reviewers and/or the Editorial Board, or does not provide an appropriate response to these suggestions.
  8. If the manuscript is rejected, the author will be notified by the Editor-in-Chief with a statement of reasons for rejection. The author may appeal to the Editor-in-Chief if he/she believes that an unfair decision has been made by attaching the author's reasons. The Editor-in-Chief will review and discuss the reasons with the Associate Editor responsible for the manuscript, and then decide whether to accept or reject the appeal.
  9. Once received by the Editor-in-Chief, the manuscript will be forwarded to the technical editor for layout. The Editor-in-Chief will send an acceptance letter announcing the publication of the edition attached with proof reading to the author.