Peer Review Process

The decision to publish a paper is based on editorial assessment and peer review. Initially, all papers are assessed by the editorial committee. The primary purpose of this initial assessment is to determine whether a paper should be sent for peer review and to provide a rapid decision for those that are not. Papers that do not meet basic standards—or are unlikely to be published irrespective of a positive peer review, for example, because their novel contribution is insufficient or their relevance to the discipline is unclear—may be rejected at this stage to avoid delays for authors who may wish to seek publication elsewhere. Occasionally, a paper will be returned to the author with requests for revisions to assist the editors in deciding whether or not to send it out for review. Manuscripts that proceed to the review process are evaluated by members of an expert panel. All such papers undergo a double-blind peer review by two or more reviewers. We take every reasonable step to ensure that author identity is concealed during the review process; however, it is the authors' responsibility to ensure that details of their prior publications, etc., do not inadvertently reveal their identity.

Reviewers' Role

Reviewers are essential to the journal's double-blind peer-review process and are required not to disclose their identity in any form. A reviewer should immediately decline to review a submitted article if they feel the manuscript falls outside their area of expertise, if they cannot complete the review in a timely manner, or if a conflict of interest exists. All submissions must be treated as confidential. Outside advice may only be sought with prior editorial approval. No reviewer should pass a submitted article to another reviewer in their own capacity; any such request should be declined immediately. As the foundation of the journal's quality assurance process, reviewers must ensure that published articles represent high-quality and original work. Reviewers should inform the Editor-in-Chief if they are aware that a manuscript under review is being considered by another publication. There are no rigid rules for analyzing an article; this should be assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the worthiness, quality, and originality of the submission, including:

• Purpose and objective of the article;

• Coherence and logical transitions within the article;

• Quality of the introduction and conclusion/recommendations;

• Appropriateness and relevance of the references provided;

• Grammar, punctuation, and spelling;

• Potential plagiarism issues; and

• Suitability of the article to the journal's scope.

A reviewer's comments largely determine the acceptance or rejection of an article. Reviewers are a major element of the peer-review process. All reviewers are asked to thoroughly evaluate the manuscripts assigned to them and to provide unbiased comments, thereby maintaining and enhancing the quality of the journal.