Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
The reviewers will rate several aspects of the manuscript, offer specific suggestions for improvement, and make a recommendation with regard to its suitability for publication. They are required to possess specific expertise in the field of the individual submission, have time to produce a report within the deadline established by the editor and to be devoid of any conflict of interest with the Authors or the content of the submission.
They are expected to be balanced and consistently fair in evaluating papers and their reports should be analytical and constructive.
The review is submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject the paper or with a request for revision (major or minor), that should be well substantiated and justified.
If major issues are identified on first reading the manuscript, the reviewer may decide to reject the paper without further input.
All information contained in the manuscript and acquired during the review process will be held in the strictest confidence.
AE evaluates the Reviews and makes a Decision
The handling AE considers all reviews received before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ considerably, the AE may invite additional reviewers in order to obtain further opinions before making a decision. The key parameters to be applied in the final evaluation of all types of submissions are: Innovation (Is the manuscript original?), Quality (clarity, logic, English language and grammar, thoroughness, layout etc.), Relevance (interest to readers, not too specific, applicability, importance of the topic, impact on social life, economy, scientific community, etc.).
Four possible decisions may therefore be reached:
Accept – the manuscript satisfies all publication parameters and is worthy of publication
Minor/Major Revisions – further revision of the manuscript is required in order to satisfy all parameters
Reject and Resubmission Suggested – the paper fails to satisfy key parameters and substantial revision of the manuscript is required to address its shortcomings
Reject – the paper fails to satisfy key parameters and it is highly unlikely that further work can address its shortcomings.
Confirmation of the Decision and Communication to the Authors
All decisions are confirmed by the EIC prior to notification.
The Editorial Office sends a decision email to the corresponding author including any relevant reviewer comments. All comments and related files will be provided in an anonymized form.
If accepted, the paper is sent to production. Reviewers will receive an email informing them of the outcome of their review. AJSS will make every effort to ensure articles are published rapidly and accurately. The corresponding author will receive a proof to implement all corrections within 48 hours. Following implementation of the corrections and signing of the Copyright Assignment by the authors, the article is published online under the licence Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial CC-BY-NC.
Copyright for commercial and associated uses will remain with the Publisher.
If the article is returned to the authors for major or minor revision, the Editorial Office will provide constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article and set a deadline for submission of the revised manuscript. Whenever possible, the revised manuscript will be assessed by the original AE and by the original reviewers. Should only minor changes be requested this follow-up review may be performed directly by the AE.
If rejected, the paper is removed from the online system. Reviewers will receive an email informing them of the final decision.