Peer review
- Manuscripts are submitted to the Editorial Office or via the online platform. All manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the Editorial Office to ensure that they comply with the guidelines.
- Manuscripts are then assigned to the Editor-in-Chief to decide whether or not they fall within the remit of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief may also refer to Associate Editors for their assessment. In the case of multi-disciplinary journals the Editor-in-Chief assigns each suitable manuscript to an Associate Editor, depending on the discipline in which the manuscript falls.
- The Editor-in-Chief, or Associate Editors can, at this stage, reject manuscripts that are too specialised for the Journal or refer manuscripts back to the authors for language editing or re-writing. If a manuscript is deemed suitable for review, the Editor-in-Chief/Associate Editor appoints and invites independent Reviewers. If the editor is of the view that the manuscript is not scholarly or sufficiently scholarly or/and if it is clear that the manuscript makes no unique contribution to the field or/and if the manuscript should not resort under the field of specialisation of the journal submitted to, the manuscript will be returned to the author.
- Reviewers are given 30 days to submit a report. (Note, however, that the stipulated time may be extended if reviewers asked for a reasonable period of postponement). At least two reports are required to make a decision. The review process is double blind, that is, both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed.
- Once at least two reports have been received, the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with an Associate Editor (if applicable), makes a decision on whether the manuscript is publishable. If Reviewers’ recommendations diverge, the Editor-in-Chief and/or Associate Editor can arbitrate the recommendation or refer the manuscript to a third Reviewer.
- Authors are given 21 days to revise a manuscript needing minor revisions and 28 days to revise a manuscript needing major revisions. Revised manuscripts are submitted to the Editorial Office or via the online platform.
- The Editor-in-Chief and/or Associate Editors then make a decision on minor revisions and refer major revisions to one or more Reviewers (the original Reviewer/s when possible) for their recommendations before making a decision. Where an Associate Editor has made the said decision, then the Editor-in-Chief must provide final approval if he or she deems it fit to do so.
- Authors can appeal a decision, in writing, to the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision will be final. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with an Associate Editor or Editors in this regard.
- Manuscripts are then assigned to the Editor-in-Chief to decide whether or not they fall within the remit of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief may also refer to Associate Editors for their assessment. In the case of multi-disciplinary journals the Editor-in-Chief assigns each suitable manuscript to an Associate Editor, depending on the discipline in which the manuscript falls.
- The Editor-in-Chief, or Associate Editors can, at this stage, reject manuscripts that are too specialised for the Journal or refer manuscripts back to the authors for language editing or re-writing. If a manuscript is deemed suitable for review, the Editor-in-Chief/Associate Editor appoints and invites independent Reviewers. If the editor is of the view that the manuscript is not scholarly or sufficiently scholarly or/and if it is clear that the manuscript makes no unique contribution to the field or/and if the manuscript should not resort under the field of specialisation of the journal submitted to, the manuscript will be returned to the author.
- Reviewers are given 30 days to submit a report. (Note, however, that the stipulated time may be extended if reviewers asked for a reasonable period of postponement). At least two reports are required to make a decision. The review process is double blind, that is, both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed.
- Once at least two reports have been received, the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with an Associate Editor (if applicable), makes a decision on whether the manuscript is publishable. If Reviewers’ recommendations diverge, the Editor-in-Chief and/or Associate Editor can arbitrate the recommendation or refer the manuscript to a third Reviewer.
- Authors are given 21 days to revise a manuscript needing minor revisions and 28 days to revise a manuscript needing major revisions. Revised manuscripts are submitted to the Editorial Office or via the online platform.
- The Editor-in-Chief and/or Associate Editors then make a decision on minor revisions and refer major revisions to one or more Reviewers (the original Reviewer/s when possible) for their recommendations before making a decision. Where an Associate Editor has made the said decision, then the Editor-in-Chief must provide final approval if he or she deems it fit to do so.
- Authors can appeal a decision, in writing, to the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision will be final. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with an Associate Editor or Editors in this regard.
