Newpubli (ISSN 2474-8242) is the first fifth-generation scientific journal

Newpubli provides a value rank for each article through peer review


Reviewer Guide of Newpubli


This guide is only for the reviewers invited by Newpubli Editorial Team.


1. Responsibilities of invited reviewers

(1) Rate the value of a preprint published by Newpubli (required);

(2) Make comments on a preprint or article published by Newpubli (encouraged).


2. What should you do if you have competing interests?

If an expert invited by Newpubli Editorial Team has competing interests with the authors or the preprint, the expert should disqualify himself or herself from involvement in the assessment of the preprint.


3. How should you rate the value of a preprint (1)?

A peer review expert invited by Newpubli Editorial Team is only required to rate the value of a preprint having been published by Newpubli by answering the following question, I think the PR-Rank of this article should be: . (selecting one number from 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9).

If you select 1, it means that you think this article is of little value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 0–0.5.

If you select 2, it means that you think this article is of a little value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 0.5–1.5.

If you select 3, it means that you think this article is of some value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 1.5–2.5.

If you select 4, it means that you think this article is of fairly great value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 2.5–3.5.

If you select 5, it means that you think this article is of rather great value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 3.5–4.5.

If you select 6, it means that you think this article is of great value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 4.5–5.5.

If you select 7, it means that you think this article is of quite great value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 5.5–10.5.

If you select 8, it means that you think this article is of very great value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are 10.5–20.5.

If you select 9, it means that you think this article is of extremely great value, and largely as valuable as the ones published in some SCI-indexed journals in the relevant field whose impact factors are no less than 20.5.

Your rating or selection is hided in the database and blind to everyone; the PR-Rank is the median of the ratings provided by some experts.


4. How should you rate the value of a preprint (2)?

(1) You should not overrate the value because some parts of the preprint are beneficial to you.

(2) You should not underrate the value because some parts of the preprint are not beneficial to you.

(3) Your rating should be based on the significance and reliability of the original data and suggestions of the preprint (approximately 80%), as well as the writing and discussion of the preprint (approximately 20%).

(4) If you relish some parts of the preprint rationally, and dislike some parts of the preprint rationally, please you rate the value mainly according to the value of the parts you relish. For example, if you relish the methods, original data and most suggestions of the preprint, but you dislike one hypothesis proposed in the preprint, please you rate the value mainly according to the value of the methods, original data and most suggestions of the preprint, rather than the value and reliability of the hypothesis which you dislike.

(5) It is hoped that your rating shall encourage rather than inhibit researchers to propose novel views.


5. How can reviewers submit their ratings?

Peer review experts invited by Newpubli Editorial Team should submit their ratings through the online rating module at the web page of the relevant preprint under its abstract (click here to view the module). They should have signed in their Newpubli account before they can make the rating. If they have not created Newpubli accounts, they can create the accounts at the home page of Newpublic or here.


6. What should you do if you think the preprint you are reviewing is of ethical problems?

If you do think the preprint you are reviewing is of any ethical problems, please do not rate its PR-Rank, and please you make such a comment ANONYMOUSLY in detail online through the comment module at the web page of the relevant preprint under its abstract. Alternatively, you can send such a comment through email to Newpubli Editorial Team (journal@newpubli.com). If the preprint is really of ethical problems, it may be revised accordingly by the authors (e.g. adding a reference in the section of the introduction to avoid the ethical claim of plagiarism), or be retracted by Newpubli. Newpubli Editorial Team wish you could consider to rate the PR-Rank of the preprint after its authors have responded well enough to your ethical claim).


7. What should you do if you think the preprint you are reviewing should be revised?

If you think the preprint you are reviewing should be revised, you can continue to rate the PR-Rank of the preprint with the consideration of the assumed flaws you have identified. Meanwhile, you are also welcome to make such comments in detail online through the comment module at the web page of the relevant preprint under its abstract (click here to view the module), and usually the authors shall respond to your comments within days (e.g. they may express that they accept your comments and shall revise the preprint accordingly). We shall greatly appreciate you for making the comments. Moreover, you can rate the PR-Rank of the preprint after its authors have responded well enough to your comments.


8. How does Newpubli score the performance of its reviewers?

(1) A reviewer invited by Newpubli Editorial Team will gain 20 points if he or she has rated the value of a preprint published by Newpubli, and further 10 points if the difference between his or her rating and the median of all the ratings of the preprint is 2, and further 30 points if the difference between his or her rating and the median of all the ratings of the preprint is 1 or 0.

(2) A reviewer invited by Newpubli Editorial Team will gain 50 points if he or she has identified an ethical problem in the manuscript, and the problem has been accepted by the authors or Newpubli Editorial Team.

(3) A reviewer invited by Newpubli Editorial Team will gain 10 to 50 points for each comment he or she has made on a preprint in a respect other than ethics, and the comment has been accepted by the authors or Newpubli Editorial Team.


9. What are the benefits of reviewers of Newpubli?

(1) A reviewer of Newpubli will be awarded one time as an Excellent Reviewer by the journal if he or she has accumulated every 500 points.

(2) A reviewer of Newpubli will be promoted to a 3-Star or an N-Star Reviewer of the journal if he or she has been awarded for 3 or N times as an Excellent Reviewer;

(3) Any Excellent Reviewer qualifies to be an Academic Editor (AE) of Newpubli, if he or she is willing to fulfill the responsibilities of AEs of Newpubli.

(4) We shall assess the performance of each peer reviewer invited by Newpubli in a rational way, and may provide some collaboration opportunities to those of excellent performance in the future.

(5) Each peer reviewer invited by Newpubli, if not required to provide peer review for free as he or she has published one or more articles in Newpubli, shall obtain 50 original shares of Newpubli for the first time of peer review he or she has provided for Newpubli, and 30 shares for each of the following times of peer review he or she has provided for Newpubli. Please see here for more information.


(Last update: 03/01/2016)


© 2017 Newpubli Corporation


Terms of Use| Privacy Statement| Advertise| Contact us

© Newpubli Corporation unless otherwise stated