Peer review process is an essential part of the manuscript publication. It improves the quality of the manuscript by providing an unbiased and expert assessment of the research and the accuracy of the results described in the manuscript. The manuscripts will be reviewed for possible publication on the understanding that they are being submitted only to AJEB and have not been published, simultaneously submitted, or accepted for publication elsewhere. The following types of contributions to AJEB are peer-reviewed: original research articles, short communications/ notes, and current review articles.
Criteria for publication
To be published in AJEB, a paper should meet four general criteria:
- Provides strong evidence for its conclusions.
- Of extreme importance to scientists in the specific field.
- Ideally, interesting to researchers in other related disciplines.
In general, to be acceptable, a paper should represent an advance in understanding likely to influence thinking in the field.
The review process
All the submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial team. AJEB aims at rapid publication of high-quality research. So, to save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are rejected promptly without external review. Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to two or three reviewers. The editors then decide based on the reviewers’ advice, from among several possibilities:
- Accepted as it is, the manuscript is accepted without any revisions.
Accepted after minor or major revision, the manuscript will be accepted after addressing the specific concerns raised by the referees.
Rejected, the manuscript will not be published in the journal, but authors can resubmit the manuscripts with further work that might justify the reevaluation of the manuscript.
Outright rejection, if the editorial team opines that manuscript does not match the scope or submission criteria of AJEB
For any general questions and comments about the peer-review process, the journal or its editorial policies that are not addressed here, we encourage reviewers to contact any member of the editorial team. Questions about a specific manuscript should be directed to the editor who is handling the manuscript.
Peer review time frame
The AJEB follows a specific review schedule and as far as possible tries to adhere to it.
Step1: Initial review of the manuscript by editorial team: 1 week
Step2: Completion of review by external referees: 1-6 weeks
Step3: Time for authors to send back the final draft of the manuscript after minor revisions: 1-2 weeks
Time for authors to send back the final draft of the manuscript after major revisions: 2-4 weeks
Step4: Time for the final decision of the editorial team: 1-2 weeks
Step5: Time for Journal for proofreading and preparing the manuscript for publication: 1-3 week
Step6: Time for authors for proofreading the final draft of manuscript: 1 week
Step7: Time for AJEB to publish: 1-2 weeks
If due to special circumstance, the review process takes more time, authors will be informed by email
It is the author’s sole responsibility to proofread the final, edited version, which the corresponding author approves of the accuracy of the manuscript on behalf of all authors. Once the proofreading is complete and the author accepts the finalized version it is published to one of our issues. Any major changes from there on are difficult, time taking and chargeable by AJEB.
Selecting peer reviewers
Reviewer selection is highly critical to the publication process, AJEB selects reviewers based on subject expertise, reputation, recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer. We check with potential reviewers before sending them manuscripts to review.
Double blind peer review
AJEB offers a double-blind peer review option. Authors who choose this option at submission remain anonymous to the referees throughout the manuscript publication process.
Access to the literature
If a reviewer does not have access to any published paper that is necessary for the evaluation of a submitted manuscript, the journal will supply the reviewer with a copy.
Reviewers need to take the responsibility of maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscript under their review. Never reveal the assigned manuscripts ideas, results or any other supplementary material to any non-reviewer.
Reviewers should not reveal their identity to the author at any time either during the process of review or after its publication.
Time taken for review
AJEB believe, that rapid editorial decisions are important to better serve authors. We, therefore expect our reviewers to respond promptly according to the suggested review timeline. If the reviewer anticipates delays, we expect them to let the editor knows so that authors can be kept informed and if necessary please suggest an alternative reviewer.
It is the use of language, thoughts, ideas or expressions of another author and representation of them as one’s own original work. And when the author reuses a substantial part of his/her own work without providing the appropriate references, is known as self-plagiarism. Note that the manuscript may be screened for plagiarism and will not be tolerated. Such manuscripts would not be considered for publication in AJEB.
Editing the reviewers report
The reviewer’s comments are transmitted as it is to the authors. On rare occasions, the editor may edit the report to remove offensive language or any comments which could reveal intended confidential information.