What makes the Frontiers Collaborative Peer Review different from the peer review of other publishers?

Frontiers operates an impact-neutral peer-review, where editors and reviewers provide comments to improve the paper unless it has objectively irreparable errors. Reviewers are not asked to judge the “importance” and “novelty” of manuscripts.  To facilitate this approach, Frontiers created a unique Interactive Review Forum – a custom-made, online system where, following an independent assessment by each reviewer,  they and the handling editor discuss issues with the authors for as many iterations as may be necessary (the median being 1.5 iterations). Frontiers editors and reviewers thus actively contribute to the quality of manuscripts. They also take joint responsibility for the published manuscript. Unlike the anonymous reviews of traditional journals, Frontiers reviewers and editors publicly sign off on the papers that they accept. Learn more here.