How does it work?

Peer review and recommendation of research articles



  1. Deposit your manuscript in an open repository, such as PaleorXiv or bioRxiv. The manuscript must have a DOI and be publicly available (Open Access). Authors preferring to opt for a double-blind peer review process should follow the procedure for anonymous submission instead (see details here).

  2. Submit your manuscript to PCI Paleontology for peer review. The manuscript must not be under review elsewhere during the evaluation process. Recommenders (editors) of PCI Paleontology are alerted of your submission, and if one of them finds it interesting he/she initiates the evaluation process (see point 3). If after 20 days none of them has manifested interest, the manuscript is released and sent back to the authors.

  3. Great! One of the recommenders finds your submission particularly interesting. The recommender initiates the evaluation process and seeks the opinion of at least two external reviewers. Recommender and reviewers must declare that they have no conflict of interest of any kind with the content or the authors of the article and that they are not close colleagues, recent co-authors, relatives, or friends of any of the authors. A classic process of peer review follows (reviews, decisions, authors' replies, revisions), and the authors are asked to upload revised versions of their article in the open archive after each revision.

  4. Eventually, the recommender decides either to reject or accept (see point 5) the revised article for recommendation.

  5. Congratulations, your article has been accepted for recommendation! The handling recommender writes a recommendation text that is published (with a DOI) on the PCI Paleontology website, alongside all of the editorial correspondence (reviews, recommender's decisions, authors' replies). A final version of the peer-reviewed article is uploaded in the open archive with a clear link to the PCI Paleontology recommendation and peer review reports. Your work can now be cited as peer-reviewed.

Note: Although this is not a mandatory step, authors have the possibility to subsequently submit their recommended article, as well as the editorial correspondence and peer review reports, to a regular journal for traditional publishing. However, authors should keep in mind that some journals have restrictive preprinting and self-archiving policies, which may be incompatible with our model. Authors are responsible to check these policies on the journal website or on SHERPA/RoMEO


Recommendation of postprints

Postprints may also be recommended by PCI Paleontology if they are of particular interest to the community. In that case, a recommendation text written by a recommender and a co-recommender is published by PCI Paleontology, without peer review.

Note: Postprints may include articles already peer-reviewed and recommended by other PCIs, evaluated by other peer review platforms, or published by conventional journals.