Editorial Workflow

Editorial Workflow

During the course of the peer-review process, every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes the editorial workflow that, mentioned below.

After submission of a manuscript to the managing editor for publication, the journal’s editorial office checks the manuscript to ensure its suitability to go through the peer review process. After this, an appropriate editor is assigned on the manuscript. The process of choosing an editor depends on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the editors. Editors, who do not have any potential conflict of interest with any of the manuscript’s author(s), are chosen.

If the editor determines that the quality of the manuscript may not be good enough to go through the normal peer review process, or the subject of the manuscript is out of the journal’s scope, the manuscript shall be rejected with no further processing. Otherwise, the manuscript will be assigned to some of external reviewers. The external reviewers are chosen only if they have no conflict of interests with the manuscript’s author(s). After that, the reviewers will submit their reports and/or comments on the manuscript. They will also send the editor, recommended actions on the manuscript.  The recommendation can be one of the following:

  1. Publish as it is
  2. Consider after Minor Changes
  3. Consider after Major Changes
  4. Reject

After submission of reports from all reviewers, the editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations:

  1. Publish as it is
  2. Consider after Minor Changes
  3. Consider after Major Changes
  4. Reject

If the Editor recommends “Publish as it is”, the manuscript will undergo a final check by the journal’s editor in chief in order to ensure that the journal’s guidelines and policies are completely followed. Then, the managing editor will notify the author(s) of the manuscript’s acceptance. After that, the manuscript will appear in the Articles in Press section of the journal’s website.

If “Consider after Minor Changes” is the editor’s recommendation, the author(s) are notified about the recommendations of the reviewers, so that they can prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript. The revised manuscript is reviewed by the editor. Once the editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript will be accepted.

If “Consider after Major Changes” is the editor’s recommendation, the author(s) are notified about the recommendations of the reviewers, so that they can prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript. The author(s) are expected to submit their revised manuscript in a timely manner. After the submission, the original reviewers are asked to review the revised manuscript. Along with their review reports on the revised manuscript, the reviewers make a recommendation which can be “Publish Unaltered”, “Consider after Minor Changes”, “Consider after Major Changes”, or “Reject”. Then, the Editor can make an editorial recommendation which can be “Publish Unaltered”, “Consider after Minor Changes”, “Consider after Major Changes”, or “Reject”.

The manuscript will be immediately rejected if the editor recommends rejecting. Also, if the majority of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate.

Since, apart from the editor in charge of the manuscript, any manuscript must be recommended by two or more external reviewers, in order for it to be accepted for publication in the journal, it is not possible for an editor to assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This ensures a fair, high-quality and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript, submitted to the journal.

The peer-review process is single blinded; that is, the reviewers know the author(s) of the manuscript are, but the author(s) do not have access to the information of peer reviewers.