Peer Review Process

Double-blind peer review is followed: Expert Reviewers and the reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of the reviewers.Peer review methods is employed to maintain standards of quality of the research paper published in the journal.

Online manuscript review

We ask peer-reviewers to submit their reports via our secure online system by following the link provided in the editor's email. The Reviewer is selected by the Section Editor to review a submission. Reviewers are asked to submit reviews to the journal'sweb site and are able to upload attachments for the use of the Editor and Author.

Ensuring a Blind Peer Review

To ensure the integrity of the blind peer-review for submission to this journal, every effort has been made to prevent the identities of the authors and reviewers from being known to each other. This involves the authors, editors, and reviewers (who upload documents as part of their review) checking to see if the following steps have been taken with regard to the text and the file properties:

  1. The authors of the document have deleted their names from the text, with "Author" and year used in the references and footnotes, instead of the authors' name, article title, etc.
  2. With Microsoft Office documents, author identification should also be removed from the properties for the file.
    For Microsoft 2003 and previous versions, and Macintosh versions of Word:
    • Under the File menu select: Save As > Tools (or Options with a Mac) > Security > Remove personal information from file properties on save > Save.
    For MacIntosh Word 2008 (and future versions)
    1. Under the File menu select "Properties."
    2. Under theSummarytabremoveall of the identifying information from all of the fields.
    3. Save the File.
    For Microsoft 2007 (Windows):
    1. Click on the office button in the upper-left hand corner of the office application
    2. Select "Prepare" from the menu options.
    3. Select "Properties" for the "Prepare" menu options.
    4. Delete all of the information in the document property fields that appear under the main menu options.
    5. Save the document and close the document property field section.
    For Microsoft 2010 (Windows):
    1. Under the File menu select "Prepare for sharing."
    2. Click on the "Check for issues" icon.
    3. click on "inspect document" icon.
    4. Uncheck all of the checkboxes except "Document Properties and Personal information".
    5. Run the document inspector, which will then do a search of the document properties and indicated if any document property fields contain any information.
    6. If the document inspector finds that some of the document properties contain information it will notify you and give you the option to "Remove all," which you will click to remove the document properties and personal information from the document.
  3. For PDF files:
    • With PDFs, the authors' names should also be removed from Document Properties found under File on Adobe Acrobat's main menu.

Section Editor's Role

Section Editors usually manage the Review of submissions and the editing of those that are accepted. A Section Editor initially assigned to a submission by an Editor. Editors send requests to Section Editors to see a submission through the editorial process.

Submissions to the journal that are assigned to the Section Editor by the Editor appear in that Section Editor's Submissions In Review queue. Section Editors have access to only those submissions to which they have been assigned.

The article Review page lists all necessary elements for the Section Editor to organize and complete the review process. The Section Editor assigns a Review Version of the article, assigns one or more Reviewers to the article, and enters an Editorial Decision. Depending on the editorial decision, the article will be moved from the Review queue to either the Editing queue or the Archives, or it will be resubmitted for review.

Reviewer's Role

The Reviewer is invited by email to review a submission, which includes its title and abstract, as well as the journal's URL and a username and password for the Reviewer to use to enter the journal.

On logging into the journal, the Reviewer arrives at the User Home page. By clicking on the role of Reviewer (as a Reviewer may be enrolled under other roles, such as an Author), the Reviewer is led to the Submissions page. This page lists the submissions which the Reviewer has been invited to review or is currently in the process of reviewing. The Submissions queue also notes what round the review is, as some reviews may have entered a second round of reviewing, following the Section Editor's decision that the submission must be "resubmitted for review." This page also provides access to past reviews which the Reviewer has completed for the journal.

 

Editor's Role

The Editor oversees the editorial process, beginning with the assignment of the Section Editor to a submission. Once all the reviews are in, the Section Editor must arrive at a decision on the submission.

Recording the Decision. The Section Editor selects a Decision from among Accept Submission, Revisions Required, Resubmit for Review, or Decline Submission.

The Section Editor should outline the basis of their decision to the Author in Editor/Author Correspondence (as the Author cannot see the Decision recorded by the Editor). The Section Editor can also upload a version of the submission possibly with suggestions or comments. Finally, the Section Editor must email the Author using the Notify Author email icon under Editor Decision. Reviewer Comments can be imported into this email by clicking Import Peer Reviews above the email subject line. Please note that comments designated by the Reviewer as editor-only are not imported.

The Section Editor can make an initial decision (Revisions Required), and then after being satisfied by the Author Version uploaded by the Author, make a second decision to Accept.

If the Section Editor selects Accept, then the next step is to designate a version of the submission to go to Copyediting on the Editing page, from among the Editor and Author versions. The default Editor Version is simply the Review Version, and the Section Editor can make changes to this version — restoring the author's name, for example — and upload it as suitable to go to Copyediting.

If the Section Editor selects Decline, the submission moves to the Archives list, with its status recorded as Declined.

Resubmit for Review. The Section Editor can initiate a second round of reviews for a submission by selecting Resubmit for Review as the Decision. The Section Editor then emails the Author of this (as the Author cannot see the Decision) and includes an outline of what needs to be done with the submission prior to resubmitting it for review. When the Author re-submits a version for review, it appears under Author Version, and the Section Editor designates it for resubmission. It then becomes the Review Version for Round 2 (and should again be checked for anonymity, and if need be, uploaded again under Review Version). The Reviewers from Round 1 will still be in place, although their reviews and recommendations will have been cleared and placed under "Regrets, Cancel, and Earlier Rounds of this Submission." The Section Editor can activate the request for each of the Reviewers from Round 1 by clicking on the email icon under Request, or the Section Editor can use Clear Reviewer and select another Reviewer for Round 2. The Editor/Author Correspondence for Round 1 is also placed under "Regrets, Cancels, & Previous Rounds" of this Submission, where the Section Editor can review it as needed.