How Does Peer Review Work?
When a paper is submitted for peer review, the author identifies which SPE journal he/she believes is most appropriate for the paper's subject matter:
- SPE Drilling & Completion
- SPE Production & Operations
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction
- SPE Journal (which operates with a slightly different review process under the guidance of an Editorial Board).
Once the paper is received for a particular journal, it receives an initial review of its suitability for review. Authors are asked to submit a justification as to why their paper merits peer review and a place in the industry's archival literature. About 26% of papers submitted are declined during this initial review for reasons such as being outside the scope of coverage of the journal, the paper is overly commercial, or the paper does not cover new or innovative material appropriate for peer review. Not being suitable for peer review is not an indictment of a paper's quality; many excellent meeting papers do not cover material appropriate for peer review in one of SPE's journals.
In some cases, if the editor believes that another of SPE's technical journals is a more appropriate place for peer review of the author's paper, they will forward it to the review committee for that journal and notify the author. But in most cases, papers will be declined if they are not appropriate for the journal to which they are submitted. So authors should check the coverage of a journal before submitting their paper.
If a paper passes the initial review stage, it is assigned to two technical editors (TEs). When the TEs complete their evaluation, the paper is forwarded to the Associate Editor (AE); the AE sends a recommendation to the Executive Editor (EE), who makes a final decision to accept or decline the paper.
Evaluations and decisions are based on several factors. SPE follows the single-blind model for peer review, where reviewers know the author's name, but authors do not know the names of those involved in review of his/her paper.
Following review, the author may be asked to revise the paper to address reviewer comments for possible publication. Authors of accepted papers commit to making timely revisions. Revisions to papers that are not made in a timely manner (within six months) may result in the paper being declined. Responding to reviewer comments is an important part of the peer review process; the paper is improved as a result -- enhancing its value as part of the peer reviewed literature of the industry. Committee members review revised manuscripts to ensure that requested changes were made. Only after the revised manuscript is accepted will it be scheduled for publication.
If a paper is not accepted for peer review, the author will be notified.
