All manuscripts submitted to IJAMS will undergo extensive evaluation while it is in the peer-review process.
Before being sent to reviewers, the submitted manuscripts are pre-screened by the editorial office to check if the submitted paper fulfils the aims and scope of the journal. In addition, the nature of the study, quantity and quality of data, general conclusions, originality of the results and presentation of the work are assessed. Also, the manuscript is assessed for the quality English language in terms of structure and grammar. Failure to fulfil the aforementioned pre-requisites may result in the rejection of the paper at this stage by the assigned editor and it is not forwarded for the review process.
Double-blind Peer ReviewIJAMS uses double-blind peer review, which means throughout the review process; both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other. Hence, authors must make sure that no identity-revealing information is present in the manuscript.
Assigning ReviewersIf the assigned editor finds the paper suitable for publication in the journal, he would select a minimum of two peer reviewers, after consulting the editors who have lately handled papers in relevant fields. This is to ensure that the selected reviewers are the most qualified in the related field as the paper and have proved their ability to provide a critical, expert, and unbiased evaluation of the paper.
Reviewing the manuscriptThe reviewers evaluate manuscripts to see if they adhere to scientific norms or not. If manuscripts do not adhere to scientific norms, suggestions are offered to the editor so that they can conform to journal publishing requirements.
Reviewers assess the manuscript for its quality, originality, methodology, results, and significance. They provide detailed comments and feedback to the authors, as well as a recommendation regarding the manuscript's suitability for publication to the editors.
The response of reviewers is submitted to the assigned editor who then makes the final decision about the fate of the submitted manuscript and falls under the following categories: “Accepted without revisions“, “Accepted with minor revisions”, “Accepted with major revisions” and “Rejected”. A brief explanation of what they mean to authors is provided below:
Accepted without revisions: The paper is accepted for publication without any further changes required from the authors.
Accepted with Minor Revision: The paper is accepted for publication in principle after allowing authors to make minor revisions as suggested by the reviewers. As no further experiment or technical work has been requested, the revised paper will not be sent back to the reviewers but accepted for publication after the editor who has been assigned the paper has checked that the reviewers' comments have been implemented and that the revised paper satisfies the format requirements (Formatting guide).
Accepted with Major Revision: This suggests that the paper will have a better chance of being accepted for publication provided the authors make significant revisions according to the reviewers' comments. In this case, further experiments or technical work may be required to address the reviewers' concerns. The revised paper will be sent back to one or both reviewers for a second round of review. The authors should also provide a point-by-point response to reviewers' comments.
Rejected: The paper is rejected because the reviewers have raised considerable technical objections and/or the authors' claim has not been adequately established.
Authors should submit their revised manuscript as early as possible to ensure timely publication. A detailed point-by-point response document addressing reviewers' and Editor's comments is requested alongside the revised manuscript to facilitate prompt evaluation. This response should elucidate how each comment has been incorporated into the revised manuscript or present a counter-argument against any criticisms. Following revision, the decision to send manuscripts back to reviewers rests on whether they have requested to review the updated version. With few exceptions, we permit only one round of major revision per manuscript. The revised manuscript, along with responses to the reviewer's comments, is submitted back to the journal. The editorial team may assess whether the authors have adequately addressed the reviewer's concerns.
Whether a paper has been accepted or rejected is finally decided by the editor. If the article needs some changes, it may be advised to the author that they resubmit the piece. Even resubmitting the article can be rejected by the editor if it is shown to have been intentionally forged, manufactured, or exaggerated.
The submitted articles go through additional processing before they are produced. To make the article as perfect as possible for the audience, professional services are used. Typographic conventions were used to order the content. For printing, the tables and figures are set up properly. The journal is produced under strict adherence to the international standards. PDFs are then sent to the author for any final edits that should be made.
Additionally, the same articles are posted online. The papers are published online once the necessary procedures for the final publication have been completed.
Indexing with bibliographic databases
We make the issues readily available by giving indexing agencies and secondary aggregating agencies access to online bibliographic information.