Peer Review Process and Policy
Peer Review Process
The entire editorial workflow is performed through email using firstname.lastname@example.org. Once a manuscript is submitted for publication, the manuscript should go through an initial screening process by the editorial board to weed out papers which are not suitable or have different focus, papers which are marginal and weak papers.
Once a manuscript is deemed suitable by the Editor(s)-in-Chief to enter the double-blind peer review process, it will be anonymized and assigned to at least 3 Editorial Review Board Members (and if needed Ad Hoc Reviewers) via email at email@example.com
The assignment of reviewers is based on the reviewers' areas of expertise. The reviewers' expertise must align with the substance of the manuscript. The present workload and availability of the reviewer are also considered.
Reviewers are given evaluation criteria and asked to provide anonymous comments to the author(s). They may also provide confidential feedback to the Editor(s)-in-Chief. Reviewers are asked to evaluate a manuscript for:
- Originality and significance of contribution. Is the manuscript congruent with the mission of the journal?
- Interest to the research community and/or to practitioners. How useful is the material to the field?
- International relevance.
- Coverage of existing literature. Does the literature review contain relevant information in support of the article?
- Use of appropriate study design including methodology and analysis. Does the article contain a detailed explanation of research methods and procedures?
- Clear, concise, and jargon-free writing. Does the article clearly state the issue(s) being addressed
- Organizational structure. Is the article clearly and logically organized? Are the author’s conclusions supported by the research
On the basis of the submitted reports the Reviewers makes one of the following recommendations:
- Major Changes
- Minor Changes
Once all reviews have been received, the Editor(s)-in-Chief will determine whether the manuscript is Accepted, requires Revision, or is Rejected.
If the manuscript is "Rejected," the author(s) are sent any review reports that have been received and are notified that their manuscript will no longer be considered for publication in the journal.
If the manuscript "Requires Revision," the authors are notified to prepare and submit an updated version of their manuscript with the necessary changes suggested by the reviewers. This might require new data to be collected or substantial revision of the text. The manuscript is then reassessed by one or more of the original reviewers before the Editor(s)-in-Chief make(s) a new recommendation.
If the manuscript is "Accepted," the manuscript will undergo a final check by the journal's editorial office to ensure the manuscript and its review process adhere to the journal's guidelines and policies. Once done, the authors will be notified of the manuscript's acceptance and provided with the formatting guidelines for final submission.
The entire review process will typically take place within 12 weeks. Should the reviewers' comments contradict one another or a report is delayed, an additional expert review will be sought. If necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the initial reviewers for re-evaluation. The Editor(s)-in-Chief may require more than one revision of a manuscript, and additional reviewers may also be invited to review the manuscript at any time.
- Organizing and maintaining an Editorial Board (minimum of 30+ Editorial Review Board Members representing researchers from international institutions).
- Recruiting quality research manuscript submissions for the journal.
- Utilizing a minimum of three Editorial Review Board Members (and Ad Hoc Reviewers as necessary) and one Associate Editor in conducting a double-blind peer review of each manuscript through the Global Vision Press (GV Press) Submission System.
- Collecting and organizing final materials for each issue, ensuring that every manuscript submission adheres to formatting and submission guidelines of Global Vision Press (GV Press).
- If a reviewer perceives that they are familiar with the identity of an author of the submitted work, they are expected to notify the Editor(s)-in-Chief as soon as possible to ensure the integrity of the blind review process.
- Upon receipt of a manuscript for review, reviewers are requested to carefully read each manuscript, supporting their evaluation with relevant examples. To help the author(s) construct a more rigorous scholarly work, reviewers will provide constructive feedback as well as a candid assessment of the value of the manuscript. Reviewers are requested to provide their overall assessment of the submitted work, followed by a list of specific comments. While grammatical corrections are valuable, the review must stretch beyond the manuscript's punctuation, spelling, and language usage to appraise its substance and contribution.
- If a reviewer believes they can't review the manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within the stipulated time, they should notify the Editor(s)-in-Chief, to ensure accurate and timely review.
- An appropriate evaluation includes an analysis of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses, suggestions on how to make it more complete, relevant, and readable, as well as any specific questions for the author(s) to address.
Journal Review Policy
- Authors should not concurrently submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
- All submitted and invited papers will go through an initial screening process by the Editor(s)-in-Chief to remove marginal, weak, and unsuitable papers. The papers which pass the initial screening process will be sent to three experts who are Editorial Review Board Members, as suggested by the associate editor, for review.
- Editor(s)-in-Chief will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. Authors will be informed when the Editor(s)-in-Chief require (s) further review.
- All publication decisions are made by the journal's Editor(s)-in-Chief based on the referees' reports. Authors of papers that are not accepted are notified promptly.
- To maintain confidentiality, all editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editors, and the publisher, as appropriate.
- Editors will require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.
- Editors will guide reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.
- If a reviewer cannot review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within the time stipulated, the reviewer should notify the Editor(s)-in-Chief, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.
- Our peer-review process is confidential and the identities of reviewers cannot be revealed.
Submission of any manuscript that contains the redundant or duplicate publication of the same or very similar research work violates the policies of each journal. If a redundant or duplicate publication is attempted or occurs, authors should expect immediate editorial action including rejection of the submitted manuscript.
Digital Preservation Policy
Global Vision Press (GV Press) undertakes to ensure the long-term preservation and accessibility of online resources for research papers. Its role is to provide access, preserve, and keep digital collections available while maintaining the essential functionality of the original digital object.