To uphold high scholarly standards, every manuscript submitted to SCIENCE OF TSUNAMI HAZARDS undergoes a thorough peer review. This involves an initial assessment by the Editor and at least one member of the Editorial Board. Following this, the manuscript is sent to one or two external reviewers with specialized expertise for further evaluation. This rigorous process, which can take up to one month, aims to ensure that published work presents original research that significantly enhances the understanding of tsunami hazards. The review determines if the manuscript is ready for publication or requires additional work. The process begins with the Editor or an Editorial Board member contacting potential reviewers from a roster of experts. Once assigned, reviewers receive an anonymized copy of the manuscript and any accompanying illustrations, typically with a two to four-week timeframe for their evaluation. They are provided with guidelines and a response form to facilitate their assessment.
The response form guides reviewers to evaluate several key criteria, including: the novelty of the contribution to tsunami hazard understanding; the rigor of the research and knowledge of the subject; the presence of speculation; the fulfillment of the stated objective; the sufficiency of supporting evidence; the accuracy and consistency of information; the adequacy of background; the clarity and detail of descriptions; the appropriateness of the title; the need for text expansion or condensation; the clarity and logical organization of the writing; the effective use of figures; and the comprehensiveness of references. The completed review forms and any accompanying comments are then evaluated by the Editor or the responsible Editorial Board member. Based on this evaluation, a recommendation is made regarding the manuscript's acceptance or rejection. The submitting author receives a decision along with an explanation and, if revisions are required, specific guidance for improvement.