Review Policies

Editorial Review and Peer Review Policies

The editorial team of the Journal shall strictly follow the policies and procedures for the editorial and peer review processes of the manuscripts through which it shall be ensured that:

  • the content of the manuscript is relevant to the aim/scope of the Journal.
  • the manuscript has produced innovative and quality research.
  • the format and layout of the Journal is followed in the manuscript, and
  • the style, grammar, and composition of language used in the manuscript is correct.

The review policy of the Journal shall involve editorial review as well as peer-review of the manuscripts. If accepted by the editorial team, the manuscript shall be processed for double-blind peer review by relevant experts of international repute. Prior to the approval for publication, a manuscript must be accepted by at least three experts of the relevant field. The identity of author(s) shall be kept secret from the peer-reviewers and vice versa in the peer-review processes. The peer-reviewers may know the identity of authors only after publication of the manuscript.

  • The manuscript submitted to Journal shall be assigned to a section editor who shall be responsible for processing it according to the Journal policy and procedure. 
  • The suggestions and comments (if any) shall be shared with author(s) for revision of the manuscript accordingly.
  • The section editor may consider the revised submission for peer-review processes without changes, ask the author(s) for minor changes, major changes or reject it out-rightly.
  • In case the article is considered for peer-review process, the manuscript shall be forwarded to an assistant editor (sub-editor) for necessary editing and formatting.
  • The formatted manuscript shall be forwarded for the double-blind peer-review to at least one local and two foreign experts (subject specialists) of an international repute.
  • In exceptional cases, the manuscript shall be sent to two local and one foreign expert of international repute. However, in this case, at least one of the local experts must have obtained PhD or Postdoc from industrially advanced countries.
  • It shall be ensured that the reviewers are selected according to the expertise relevant to the submitted manuscript.
  • The section editor shall seek to have at least one reviewer from the country or region that is the focus of the manuscript.
  • The peer-reviewers shall specifically evaluate the manuscript for quality of the research on the basis of its relevancy, originality, and innovation.
  • The author(s) must incorporate all the required changes according to the suggestions and comments of reviewers. In case of difference(s), if any, the author(s) shall record clarification(s) or explanation(s) for each observation or comment of disagreement.
  • The revised and updated version of the manuscript shall be examined by the section editor for validation and verification of the required changes in accordance with the suggestions and comments of the reviewers.
  • The Editor may request an expert opinion of editorial adviser(s) for resolving the difference(s) or the conflicting report(s), if any.
  • The final decision about publishing or rejecting the revised and updated manuscript is taken by the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal.

The peer-reviewers of the Journal shall carry out the evaluation of an article on the basis of following 10 principles and standards as a minimum requirement for acceptance of a manuscript. 

  1. The title is brief, clear, and appropriate to the content/purpose of the article. (Example: Active verbs are used instead of complex noun-based phrases. It is around 10 to 12 words long and summarises the main idea or ideas of the study.)
  2. The abstract accurately describes content of the paper. (Example: It discusses a compact view of the research problem, purpose of study, research design, key findings, and is 180-200 words long.)
  3. The Keywords are enough and appropriate. (Example: It does not use words or phrases from the title and supplement the title's contents. These are descriptive, represents key concepts, nouns, and are 8-10 words.)
  4. The Introduction give an overview from a general subject area to a particular topic of inquiry. (Example: It describes the purpose, scope, context, significance, background, hypothesis(es), question(s), brief methodology, outcome(s), an outline of remaining structure/organisation of the article.)
  5. The Literature Review gives an overview of the sources explored and demonstrates how the study fits within the larger field of the study. (Example: It gives a description, summary, and critical evaluation of sources explored in relation with research problem(s) being investigated.)
  6. Research Methodology is adequately described. (Example: It describes the actions taken for investigation of the research problem and the rationale for the application of the specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select, process, and analyse the information applied to understanding the problem.)
  7. Results are clearly presented. (Example: It reports the findings of the study based upon the methodology(ies) being applied, and in a logical sequence without bias or interpretation, if data is generated from the author’s own research.)
  8. Discussion is clear and are the findings accurately analysed. (Example: It interprets and describes significance of findings in light of what was already known about research problem. It explains new understanding or insights being emerged based on studying the problem. It is connected to introduction through research questions or hypothesis(es) and the literature reviewed.)
  9. Conclusion is supported by findings of the results. (Example: It helps the readers to understand why the research should matter to them. It gives a synthesis of key points and, (if applicable), recommends new areas for future research.)
  10. English Language and Style meets the standard. (Example: It is clear, unambiguous and objective, i.e., gives reasons, evidence. It uses active voice and minimum level of passive voice is used where required. Mostly uses ordinary language rather than complicated expressions and technical terminologies.)