Peer Review Policy Statement: The practice of peer review is to ensure that good scholarly work is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is standard practice at all reputable journals. Our editorial executive team (Editor, Production Editor, Sub-Editors- discipline area) together with referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of multi-discipline research and all manuscripts, including those that appear in Special Issues, are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below: (see also the publication flow chart)
STEP 1: Initial manuscript evaluation
Due to the large number of papers submitted each year to this journal (circa 8,000), the Production Editor first evaluates the manuscript for ‘fit’ and ‘compliance’ to the journal’s mission and publication standards. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal.
Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage are usually informed within 3-10 days of submission. Papers which are deemed viable but have poor English, grammatical or formatting errors at this stage may be forwarded to third party academic support entities to assist authors to meet our publication standards. Fees are applicable for this service. The journal is committed to equal opportunity. (Statistics to date indicate a rejection rate of 59%)
STEP 2: Peer Review Processing
To manage the large volume of submissions made each year the journal manages papers by way of discipline area. The Production Editor filters papers to a respective discipline editorial team. Each discipline area is headed by a Sub-Editor, who is an expert in the associated discipline (field of research) and a member of the editorial board. This role is supported by a discipline sub-committee. The sub-editor is responsible for managing the peer review process, supported by the Production Editor .
-Humanities, Languages and Literature and Education
-Health and Welfare
-Science and Technology
-Business and Industry
STEP 3: Peer Review
Those papers that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least 2 experts for review; these may include members of the Editorial Board, audited reviewers nominated by the Author or those from the list of approved journal reviewers. Reviewers are asked to complete a proforma and to indicate reviews that may be required of the paper for publication.
- Type of peer review This journal employs double blind reviewing, where the referees remain anonymous to authors throughout the
- How referees are selected: The journal manages papers in discipline areas. Each discipline area has a sub-editor and a committee to oversight the process. Referees are matched to papers according to their expertise and recent reviewing history. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author(s) though these recommendations may or may not be used
- Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: *is original• is methodologically sound• follows appropriate ethical guidelines• has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions• correctly references previous relevant Referees are not expected to correct or copy edit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. A standard report template is used.
- How long does the review process take? Typically manuscripts are reviewed within 4 weeks of submission but substantially longer review times are not uncommon, especially for papers on esoteric topics where finding qualified referees can itself take months. Should the referees' reports contradict one another, or a report is unduly delayed, a further expert opinion is often sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees upon receipt. Referees may and frequently do request more than one revision of a
STEP 3: Notification/ Publication
- Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript is made by the Editor, acting on advice from discipline Sub-Editor/ committee. An acceptance notification is sent to the author: recommendations made by the referees, and usually included verbatim comments by the referees. The journal may refer the author and their paper to a third part academic support service to assist them in revising their paper especially if the major issue is English language/ writing / academic
- Editor's decision is final: Referees advise the Editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the