Peer-reviewed process

Peer-reviewed process

Regarding the peer review procedure

One cannot overestimate the value of peer review to the caliber of published research. Your submitted article will be evaluated by at least two impartial reviewers. When determining whether to publish your article or not, the editor will take the feedback from the peer reviewers into consideration.

How important is peer review?

Peer review is described as "the appraisal of publications submitted to journals by academics who are not on the editorial staff." Peer review, according to 91% of authors, improves the caliber of their papers. Peer review protects the integrity of science by disqualifying studies that are flawed or substandard.

How does it work?

Before the editor of the AJBE may make a decision on whether or not to publish a submitted manuscript, it must be evaluated by at least two qualified reviewers.

  1. The journal's editor will ask subject-matter specialists to review your submission and provide feedback on the manuscript.
  2. Reviewers remark on a range of issues, including whether the research is well-conducted. If the research results are inadvertent or incomplete or preliminary, reviewers can help the author/s focus, find errors, and generate new conception.
  3. The feedback from the reviewers Indicates if the article was accepted or rejected by the editor.

Peer reviews are conducted most frequently in either a single-blind or double-blind format.

  1. In single-blind review, the author is not aware of the identities of the reviewers, but the reviewers are aware of the author's identity.
  2. In a double-blind study, neither the author nor the reviewers know who the other is.

Although the reviewer will be able to provide an honest and impartial evaluation of the research using either method, the AJBE generally favors the double-blind review approach.

Blind Review Process of AJBE

Blind review is a common practice in academic journals where the identities of the authors and reviewers are kept confidential to ensure an impartial and unbiased review process. Here is a guideline for blind review in AJBE:

  1. Manuscript Submission: Authors should submit their manuscripts without any identifying information in the main text, file properties, or file names. This includes removing any references to their own previously published work that may reveal their identity. Additionally, authors should choose a title that does not disclose their identity.
  2. Anonymizing the Manuscript: Authors should take care to remove any identifying information from the main text, including in-text citations, figure captions, and references. They should use generic terms like "Author(s)" or "Researcher(s)" instead of using their own names or affiliations. Care should also be taken to anonymize the supplementary materials, if applicable.
  3. Cover Letter: Authors should include a separate cover letter with their submission that provides all relevant information, including the title of the manuscript, the names and affiliations of all authors, and any conflicts of interest. This cover letter should be uploaded as a separate file and not included in the main manuscript file to maintain anonymity during the review process.
  4. Reviewer Selection: The editors of AJBE should select reviewers who are experts in the field and have no conflicts of interest with the authors or their research. Reviewers should also be instructed to maintain confidentiality and not disclose any information about the manuscript or the review process.
  5. Reviewer Guidelines: Reviewers should be provided with guidelines that emphasize the importance of maintaining confidentiality and not attempting to reveal the authors' identities. Reviewers should focus solely on the quality and merits of the manuscript and provide constructive feedback for improvement.
  6. Editorial Process: During the editorial process, editors should ensure that the reviewers' comments do not contain any information that may reveal the authors' identities. Editors should also make sure that the revised manuscript, if submitted by the authors, does not contain any identifying information.
  7. Decision and Feedback: After the review process is complete, the decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection should be communicated to the authors without revealing the identities of the reviewers. Feedback should be provided in a constructive and impartial manner, focusing on the quality of the manuscript and not on the authors' identities.
  8. Final Publication: Once the manuscript is accepted, the authors can be asked to provide their names, affiliations, and acknowledgments for inclusion in the published article. This information should not be provided to the reviewers or editors during the blind review process.

By following these blind review guidelines, AJBE can ensure a fair and unbiased review process that focuses solely on the quality of the manuscript and promotes academic integrity.

What qualities do editors and reviewers seek?

During the peer review process, editors and reviewers seek to identify:

Clarity: The quality of writing that is characterized by clarity and concision is highly valued by editors and reviewers. The search is for content that is comprehensible, well-structured, and devoid of any vagueness or specialized terminology.

Originality: The quality of originality is highly esteemed by editors and reviewers in terms of content. Individuals aspire to engage in employment that introduces novel concepts, understandings, or viewpoints, and augments the preexisting corpus of information or written works.

Accuracy: In academic writing, it is expected that the content presented is supported by reliable sources or evidence and is factually accurate. This is a requirement that editors and reviewers look for in order to ensure the credibility and validity of the work. The individuals seek employment that involves comprehensive research and meticulous fact verification to establish its credibility and dependability.

Quality of Writing: The caliber of writing is highly valued by editors and reviewers, who hold in high regard content that exhibits proficient language abilities, encompassing appropriate grammar, punctuation, and style. The individuals seek employment opportunities that are intellectually stimulating, skillfully executed, and refined.

Relevance: The assessment of content relevance to the intended audience and publication is a crucial task carried out by editors and reviewers. Individuals endeavor to secure employment that is congruent with the goals and parameters of the periodical or the aims of the evaluation procedure.

Rigor: Academic rigor is highly appreciated by editors and reviewers, who prioritize work that exhibits a meticulous and thorough approach to research or analysis. The search is directed towards content that is underpinned by rigorous methodology, reliable data, and logical reasoning.

Significance: The assessment of the significance or importance of the work is carried out by editors and reviewers. The evaluators seek out material that pertains to pertinent inquiries, provides a noteworthy contribution to the discipline, or possesses the capability to influence the intended readership.

Objectivity: Academic writing requires objectivity, which entails ensuring that the content is devoid of any biases or conflicts of interest that could potentially undermine its integrity. This expectation is shared by editors and reviewers alike. The audience seeks objectivity and equity in the exposition of concepts or discoveries.

Coherence: The quality of logical coherence and well-structured composition is highly valued by editors and reviewers. Academic evaluators seek out content that exhibits a coherent and structured presentation of concepts or viewpoints, characterized by a rational progression of data.

Compliance: In order to ensure compliance with submission guidelines and requirements, editors and reviewers may impose specific expectations on authors. The search is conducted for work that conforms to established guidelines, which encompass aspects such as formatting, citation methodology, and word limit.

Ethical Considerations: In academic circles, ethical considerations are highly regarded by editors and reviewers. These considerations include the appropriate attribution of sources, the avoidance of plagiarism, and the careful consideration of any potential conflicts of interest.

Timeliness: In academic publishing, there is a tendency for editors and reviewers to give preference to manuscripts that tackle current or timely issues, particularly in fields or domains that are rapidly evolving or undergoing significant changes.

Open-mindedness: The quality of open-mindedness is valued by editors and reviewers, as it demonstrates a willingness to consider diverse perspectives, regardless of personal agreement. The evaluators seek out material that showcases a proclivity towards intellectual inquisitiveness and an openness to examining a variety of perspectives.

Constructive feedback is an essential aspect of the editorial and review process, and it is highly valued by editors and reviewers. Authors who demonstrate openness to feedback and a willingness to incorporate suggested revisions into their work are particularly appreciated.

In general, editors and reviewers endeavor to procure material that is lucid, inventive, precise, eloquent, pertinent, meticulous, noteworthy, impartial, cohesive, adherent to regulations and ethical principles, punctual, impartial, and amenable to constructive criticism. Conforming to these attributes may enhance the likelihood of achieving success in the publication or review procedure.