Yes, Taylor & Francis journals are peer-reviewed; each journal states its review model on its Aims & Scope page.
If you’re choosing where to submit, you want a straight answer on peer review. Taylor & Francis runs peer review across its journals, with the exact setup chosen by each title. You’ll see the method spelled out on the journal’s Aims & Scope page and in the Instructions for Authors. The sections below show how it works, how to confirm a journal’s policy, and what the timeline usually looks like.
What Peer Review Means At Taylor & Francis
Peer review is an independent check by subject-area researchers who judge whether a manuscript is suitable for the journal and how it can be strengthened. At Taylor & Francis, editors screen new submissions, invite expert reviewers, and make the decision after weighing the reports. The process is designed to filter weak work and improve solid work through revision.
Journals in this portfolio choose a model that fits their field. Some use anonymized reviews, some prefer transparency, and one platform in the group posts articles first and then runs open review. The table below gives you a quick map of the models you’ll see.
Common Peer Review Models Across The Portfolio
| Model | What Authors See | Typical Use At T&F |
|---|---|---|
| Single-anonymized | Reviewers know author names; authors don’t see reviewer names. | Many humanities and social-science titles. |
| Double-anonymized | Neither side knows identities during review. | Common in STEM and some social-science journals. |
| Open peer review | Reviewer names shared; in some cases, reports are public. | Used on F1000Research and select pilot journals. |
| Transparent review history | Accepted articles include the review history or decision letter. | Adopted by a small but growing set of titles. |
| Registered Reports | Methods and analysis plan reviewed before data collection. | Method-heavy fields where preregistration helps. |
| Post-publication comments | Community feedback after publication supplements pre-publication review. | Letters to the editor and platforms like PubPeer. |
| Editorial review for formats | Short formats (e.g., editorials) may be screened by editors only. | Non-research article types noted on the journal page. |
Across these models the constant is independent assessment by experts. Most research articles go to two or more reviewers, with the editor guiding revision rounds until the piece is ready or declined. Clear communication and timeliness keep authors oriented.
Are Taylor And Francis Journals Peer-Reviewed? Policy Details And Proof
Taylor & Francis states that articles in its journals go through peer review, and it publishes guidance for authors and editors describing that process. You can confirm the policy for any single journal by opening its Aims & Scope page and scanning the peer-review statement. Many titles also link to their Instructions for Authors, which restate the model and formatting needed for anonymized review.
To back this up with sources: the Author Services page “Understanding peer review” explains the purpose, common models, and steps editors follow. The “Editorial policies” hub sets standards on ethics, reviewer conduct, corrections, and retractions. Both pages reflect practice across the portfolio, point you to journal-level specifics, and they link from most journal pages for easy reference. These two pages sit at the core of the program and are kept current.
How To Check A Specific Journal’s Policy
- Open the journal home page on Taylor & Francis Online.
- Click Aims & Scope. Look for the peer-review statement; note whether the journal uses single- or double-anonymized review, or another model.
- Open Instructions for Authors. Check any steps for anonymizing files, the number of suggested reviewers (if requested), and the policy on preprints.
- Scan recent articles. Many journals print decision letters or review histories on accepted papers when they use a transparent model.
What To Expect From Submission To Decision
Typical Steps In The Editorial Flow
While timelines vary by journal and field, the sequence is fairly standard. Here’s what usually happens after you hit submit:
- Initial checks: The editor or office screens scope, format, ethics statements, and plagiarism.
- Reviewer invitations: Two or more specialists are invited; if they accept, the review clock starts.
- Reports arrive: Reviewers comment on methods, interpretation, and presentation, and recommend revision, acceptance, or rejection.
- First decision: Most papers get a revise decision. You’ll address point-by-point in a response letter.
- Second look: The editor, and sometimes the same reviewers, check the revision.
- Final decision: Accept, reject, or transfer to a better-fitting journal.
Many journals welcome preprints. Some allow open data links and reviewer recognition services. If the journal runs double-anonymized review, make sure your files are scrubbed of names and affiliations.
Where The Models Differ
In single-anonymized review, reviewers can see your identity, which some editors prefer in author-driven fields. Double-anonymized review aims to reduce bias tied to name or institution. Open peer review trades anonymity for transparency; readers can see who reviewed and what they said. F1000Research, a Taylor & Francis platform, publishes first and then runs invited, signed reviews in public, with article status updated as reviews come in.
Linking To The Official Guidance
You can read the Taylor & Francis overview of peer review on its Author Services site Understanding peer review. For rules that apply across journals, see the Editorial policies, including sections on reviewer ethics, corrections, and retractions. These two pages anchor the guidance you’ll use.
How Reliable Is The Process?
Peer review isn’t perfect, but Taylor & Francis backs it with ethics infrastructure and community norms. The company is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and aligns retraction and correction actions with COPE guidance. Many journals also participate in industry initiatives on research integrity and screening. The mix of anonymized and transparent models gives editors flexibility to fit field norms while keeping accountability in view.
What That Means For Authors
- Quality gate: Peer review filters weak claims and improves strong work through specific fixes.
- Clear records: When journals publish decision letters or reviewer names, readers can see how the paper was built.
- Ethics backbone: COPE-aligned policies guide handling of conflicts, misconduct, and corrections.
How To Verify A Journal Before You Submit
If you’re new to a title, take five minutes to confirm scope and process. The checklist below keeps you on track.
Five-Point Journal Check
| Where To Look | What You Should Find | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Aims & Scope | Clear peer-review statement and model. | Confirms that research papers are reviewed by experts. |
| Instructions For Authors | File prep rules for anonymized review; ethics and data notes. | Prevents desk rejects and delays. |
| Recent Articles | Editorial notes, review history (if used), corrections when needed. | Signals process transparency and upkeep. |
| Editorial Board | Named scholars with field expertise. | Shows oversight and accountability. |
| Indexing Page | Databases where the journal is listed. | Helps you gauge reach in your field. |
| Publisher Ethics Page | Link to COPE and retraction policy. | Assures standard handling of problems. |
| Submission Portal | Clear steps, file types, and contact route. | Makes the process smoother once you submit. |
F1000Research: A Taylor & Francis Open Model
Within the group, F1000Research uses a publish-then-review system. Articles post as Version 1 after basic checks. Invited experts then publish signed reports that appear beside the article. Authors can post new versions as they address comments. Indexing services track the article once it reaches a set threshold of positive reviews. It’s different in sequence, but it is still built on peer review.
Practical Tips For A Smooth Review
Set Up Your Files
- Follow the journal’s template and reference style to avoid desk checks.
- If the journal uses double-anonymized review, remove names, affiliations, and self-citing language from the manuscript and file metadata.
- Label figures and data clearly; link to a repository if the journal encourages open data.
Write For Reviewers
- State the research question and contribution in the abstract and first page.
- Show why methods fit the question; report software versions and settings that affect results.
- Pre-register or share protocols when it suits the design; some journals accept Registered Reports.
Reply Like A Pro
- Quote each reviewer point and answer it directly.
- Mark changed passages in the manuscript and point to line numbers in your letter.
- Where you disagree, give data or citations and keep the tone steady.
Answers To Common Reader Questions
Do All Taylor & Francis Journals Use The Same Model?
No. Each journal picks a model that fits its field. Many use single- or double-anonymized review. A smaller group uses open or transparent models. One platform in the group, F1000Research, runs post-publication open review.
Are There Non-Reviewed Article Types?
Yes. Editorials, book reviews, or news items can be screened by editors without external reports. The journal page will label these formats. Research articles and reviews go through peer review.
Where Can I See The Rules?
Mid-article you’ll find links to the Taylor & Francis pages that set out peer review steps and cross-journal policies. Use those links when you prepare files and pick a target journal.
Final Take On Taylor & Francis Peer Review
So, are taylor and francis journals peer-reviewed? Yes—the publisher applies peer review across its research journals, and each title explains the model it uses. If you want to double-check, open Aims & Scope and the Instructions for Authors. That’s the fastest way to confirm the exact setup before you submit. With that, you can pick the venue that fits your work and write to the model the editor runs. If you’ve asked yourself “are taylor and francis journals peer-reviewed?” the answer is clear and consistent.