Menu Close

The Journal follows a double-blind peer review process, which means that both the reviewer(s) and author(s) identities are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This means that the reviewer(s) of the paper won’t get to know the identity of the author(s), and vice-versa. Peer review helps validate research, establish a method by which it can be evaluated, and increase networking possibilities within research communities.

The following is the review process that every manuscript submitted to the Journal undergoes:

Once a manuscript is submitted for publication, it is initially screened by the Managing editor in terms of the scope of the Journal, and basic language and grammar. It is rare but entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be rejected at this stage.

If the Managing editor determines that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the Journal, the manuscript is forwarded for the double-blind peer review to two members of the Editorial Board who are most competent to review it, depending upon the subject of the manuscript and availability of editors.

The reviewers will then submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendations for one of the following actions to the Managing Editor:

  • Acceptance
  • Acceptance after minor changes
  • Rejection

When both the editors have submitted their reports, the Managing editor shall have the authority to take one of the following editorial decisions:

  • Publish
  • Accept & publish after minor changes – the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. Only the Managing editor reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors, and if satisfied, accepts the manuscript for publication.
  • Reject

However, if both the editors recommend either acceptance of manuscript as it is, or rejection of manuscript, the same shall be done by the Managing editor immediately. In all other cases including those of conflicting recommendations, the Managing editor may exercise his discretion based upon the reports submitted by both the editors.

The entire review process is completed within 7 working days.