Peer review is obtaining advice on manuscripts from reviewers/experts in the manuscript’s subject area.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
- Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness
- Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
- Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
- Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources
- Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
The following information regarding the peer-review process is true for all Afarand journals:
- All content published by Afarand journals is peer-reviewed.
- External experts conduct peer reviews, and the editorial board team is not allowed to review the articles published in their work journal.
The Afarand journals' peer-review process is double-blinded.
- Peer-review policies are clearly defined in Afarand journals.
- Afarand journal editors send the manuscripts to the recommended reviewers to comment on the manuscript if the reviewers meet the journal's criteria.
- Neither reviewers nor authors know each other, and their identities are masked from each other.
- Letters, editorials, and other types of supplementary material are not peer-reviewed in Afarand journals.
- Reviews of the articles are not posted in Afarand journals.
- Reviews are not signed; hence, both reviewers and authors are anonymous.
- Editors ensure that the reviewers have access to all the material they need to evaluate an article.
- The editor-in-chief finally decides on the manuscript and the article's acceptance or rejection. This decision depends on the journals' disciplines and policies mentioned on their websites.
- Afarand journals notify both authors and reviewers of the articles' acceptance or rejection. The editor-in-chief may hand this responsibility over to other editors.
- As mentioned earlier, some exceptions to peer-reviewing might not be mentioned on journals' websites. For example, editorials and letters are not peer-reviewed in journals published by Afarand.
- All exceptions to the peer-reviewing process are stated in the articles, and everyone can access them.
- The article's initial acceptance never guarantees its acceptance. Statements of peer-review times are supported by published timeframes on accepted papers. In case of delay, authors are informed via email explaining the reason. They can withdraw their manuscript or wait for the process to be completed.
- All Afarand journals' articles mention the submission, acceptance, and publication dates on the first page.
- Each Afarand journal has its own specific requirements for data analysis, which are posted on its websites for the authors to access.
Article Processing Flowchart
