From submission to final decision or publication, one dedicated Science Force staff member coordinates the review process and serves as the main point of contact for authors, academic editors, and reviewers. The process is single-blind for most journals, meaning that the author does not know the identity of the reviewer, but the reviewer knows the identity of the author. Some Science Force journals operate double-blind peer review, where in addition to the author not knowing the identity of the reviewer, the reviewer is unaware of the author’s identity. Conference journals operate a different peer review standard. The peer review process is handled by the conference committee, and the review method as well as the number of reports is decided by the conference organizers' requirements. At least two review reports are collected for each submitted article. The academic editor can suggest reviewers during pre-check. Alternatively, Science Force editorial staff will use qualified Editorial Board members, qualified reviewers from our database, or new reviewers identified by web searches for related articles. Authors can recommend potential reviewers. Science Force staff ensure that there are no potential conflicts of interest and will not consider those with competing interests. Authors can also enter the names of potential peer reviewers they wish to exclude from consideration in the peer review of their manuscript, during the initial submission of the manuscript. The Editorial Team will respect these requests as long as they do not interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission. If the journal has a reviewer board, these reviewers could apply to review a submitted manuscript should the authors agree to this option during submission. The following criteria are applied to all reviewers: They should hold no conflicts of interest with any of the authors; They should not come from the same institution as the authors; They should not have published together with the authors in the last three years; They should hold a PhD or be a MD (applicable for medical journals); They should have relevant experience and have a proven publication record in the field of the submitted paper (Scopus or ORCID); They should be experienced scholars in the field of the submitted paper; They should hold an official and recognized academic affiliation. Reviewers who are accepted to review a manuscript are expected to: Have the necessary expertise to judge manuscript quality; Provide quality review reports and remain responsive throughout peer review; Maintain standards of professionalism and ethics. Reviewers who accept a review invitation are provided 8–25 days to write their review via our online platform. Extensions can be granted on request. When reviewing a revised manuscript, reviewers are asked to provide their report within three days. Extensions can also be granted on request. To assist academic editors, Science Force staff handle all communication with reviewers, authors, and the external editor. Academic editors can check the status of manuscripts and the identity of reviewers at any time, and are able to discuss manuscript review at any stage with Science Force staff.