Academic CentreReview policy and procedure
Intellectual Contribution: Manuscripts are evaluated solely for their intellectual contribution. Editors, reviewers, and the publisher are required to maintain confidentiality and not disclose any information about a manuscript to third parties.
Double-Blind Review: The journal employs a double-blind review policy to ensure the publication of excellent research. This means that the identities of both the authors and reviewers are kept confidential during the review process.
Revisions: Authors may be asked to make several revisions to their manuscript based on feedback from reviewers.
Editorial Decision: The editor makes the final decision on whether to accept or reject a paper based on the opinions of the reviewers.
Review Timeline: The first round of the review process typically takes one to two months, depending on the availability of the reviewers. Authors are expected to return their improved paper within two weeks after receiving the reviews. If additional revisions are needed, the second round of reviews may take several more months.
Responsiblities of the editor
Maintaining Ethical Standards: The editor is responsible for upholding ethical standards and ensuring the high scientific quality of papers admitted for publication in the journal.
Manuscript Evaluation: The editor evaluates manuscripts before sending them to reviewers. Papers that do not align with the aims and scope of the journal may be rejected at this stage. Manuscripts requiring substantial changes for language and formatting may also be rejected.
Reviewer Selection: The editor ensures that reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the subject matter.
Dealing with Research Misconduct: If informed about research misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification or fabrication), the editor or publisher addresses it according to COPE's guidelines. Corrections or apologies are published when necessary.
Responsibilites of the reviewer
Assisting the Editor: Reviewers assist the editor in making decisions about the inclusion of articles in the journal and may also help authors in improving their articles.
Confidentiality: Reviewers treat manuscripts as confidential proprietary information and may not use or disclose them to any third party except the editor or deputy editor.
Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers are requested to evaluate the originality and international significance of the manuscript, the selection and analysis of theories, the choice and application of research methods, the analysis of results and conclusions, as well as the language use and formatting of the paper.
Objective Analysis: Reviewers provide an objective analysis of the paper and formulate recommendations to the authors for improving its quality.
Communication: Reviewers should notify the editor about any unexpected delays in the review process and inform the editor about any existing conflicts of interest prior to the reviewing process.
The review form