Reviewer Guideline

All manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below:

Initial Manuscript Evaluation

The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. 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. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.

Type of Peer Review

This journal employs single blind review, where the referee remains anonymous throughout the process.

How the Referee is Selected

Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author 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
  • Have results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
  • Correctly references previous relevant work
  • Referees are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.


How Long Does the Review Process Take?

Typically, the manuscript will be reviewed within 3 weeks. Should the referees' reports contradict to one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion will be sought. Referees may request more than one revision of a manuscript.

Final Report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees and may include verbatim comments by the referees.

Editor's Decision is Final

Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.