Peer review Policy & Process

Selection of Reviewers:

A careful selection of national and international reviewers is made keeping in view their area of research. To get an unbiased review, the names of reviewers are kept confidential. All works submitted for publication are reviewed objectively without regard to authors’ race, gender, religious view, ethnicity, citizenship, political tendency, age and reputation.

The Review Process:

Received articles are initially scrutinized by editorial committee and then processed through double-blind peer review process.

Sufficient guidelines along with a Reviewer’s Proforma are provided to reviewers.

Reviewer’s comments are shared with the author who is responsible to incorporate the suggested corrections in his article.

Dealing with Misconduct: Reviewers are encouraged:

To comment on ethical issues and possible misconduct.

To confirm plagiarism through Turnitin and/or searching for similar titles etc.

To publish a corrigendum, remove and retract a plagiarized article.

Transparency

Only one paper as a PI (Principle Investigator) should be published in the same issue.

Authorship & co-authorship policy will be strictly adopted.

Conflict of Interest

The editors and reviewers will not edit a submitted paper for those author(s) and/or institution against which she/he has any conflicts of interest.

Disclosure

will not use any unpublished information/data from the submitted research paper without the permission of the author(s)

Publication Decisions

Only shortlisted research papers relevant to the scope of the journal will be published after completion of the review process

Acceptation or rejection of a paper will be based on academic standards.

The Editor will justifies the reason (s) of rejecting a research paper and will timely communicate the editorial decision to the author(s)

Procedure for Appeal/Complaint Policy

The Editor is responsible for establishing a proper mechanism for appeals launched against:

The rejection of a research paper.

Objections to publications causing harm to any party.

Infringement of Ethical boundaries in any manner.

Publication Charge Policy

       There is no process/publication fee.

Steps in Peer Review Process

The peer review process can be broadly described as follows:

S.No

Steps of Review Process

Estimated Time

1

Submission of paper

-

2

First internal review *

3-4 weeks

3

External review

4-5 weeks

4

Communication of review reports to authors for minor/major revision **

1 week

5

Submission of the revised paper

4-8 weeks

6

Second internal review (to assess whether reviewers suggestions have been incorporated satisfactorily) ***

2-4 weeks

7

Acceptance of paper (on successful submission of revised paper)

1 week

* Paper is returned to authors if it does not meet the basic criteria.

** Paper is returned to authors if external reviewers find that the research paper has serious faults that cannot be resolved through a major revision.

*** Authors are requested for further revision if editors find that reviewers’ suggestions have not been incorporated satisfactorily.

Note: Authors are requested to revise the paper carefully to the reviewers’ suggestions to avoid unnecessary delay in the review process.

Resubmission of paper (after peer review)

Nearly every published paper goes through at least one revision. Authors should take a revision request as good news and an opportunity to learn and improve the quality of their research paper. They are directed to carefully revise the paper by the reviewers’ suggestions to avoid unnecessary interruption in the review process. Generally, when the review report is provided, each review point must either be incorporated in the revised version of the paper or an appropriate response is expected from the Author. Author(s) should be very careful regarding the accuracy and completeness of the reviewers’ suggested points to avoid further review and delay (further revision can be recommended if editors find that reviewers’ suggestions have not been incorporated satisfactorily).

Keeping in view the other academic/professional commitments, authors may request extra time if they feel that revision needs more effort and time to improve the quality of the paper.