Editors

The editorial team stands widely acknowledged as the cornerstone of any scholarly journal. All Academia Publications journals are overseen by a cadre of highly qualified researchers, boasting significant expertise within their respective domains. The editorial office collaborates closely with our esteemed Editors throughout the entire publication journey. For a comprehensive understanding of our peer review process and editorial workflow, we invite you to explore our Peer Review Process page.

An Editor's principal responsibility revolves around managing the Peer Review process for articles. Working in close conjunction with the editorial office, they undertake manuscripts that align with their areas of expertise, judiciously select proficient reviewers, and furnish authors with meticulous evaluation outcomes.

As an Editor, several factors necessitate careful consideration before accepting a review invitation. The Editor must promptly inform the editorial office of potential conflicts of interest with the authors in order to facilitate reassignment.

Reviewer Selection

It is the responsibility of editors to meticulously select evaluators for scholarly review. Within our vast repository of dedicated volunteers, you possess the freedom to handpick those reviewers who most aptly align with the manuscript's purview. The prerogative of seeking external reviewers remains at your disposal in case you harbor reservations about the ability of the current reviewers to render a fair assessment of the research.

Peer Review Process

It is the responsibility of journal editors to provide authors with meticulous, informative, and impartial evaluations of their research.

Editors assume responsibility for overseeing the entire review process of an article, seamlessly coordinating with reviewers to ensure a prompt yet effective dissemination of the peer review report. As an editor, you are mandated to meticulously monitor the caliber of reviewers' commentary, ensuring their focus centers on the following critical parameters within their reports:

  1. Assessing the novelty and ingenuity demonstrated in the research.
  2. Evaluating the significance and impact of the study in its respective field.
  3. Scrutinizing the adherence to ethical principles and guidelines in conducting the research.
  4. Ensuring due recognition and citation of previous relevant studies.

Our peer review process adheres to a single-blinded approach, wherein reviewers possess knowledge of the manuscript's authors while maintaining anonymity from the authors' perspective. It is incumbent upon editors to guarantee strict adherence to this practice, safeguarding against any inadvertent sharing of information with the authors or any other researchers.

Rendering the Final Decision

Editors are tasked with the arduous responsibility of entrusting a manuscript to no fewer than three esteemed reviewers for rigorous evaluation, necessitating a minimum of two comprehensive reviews to culminate in the issuance of a final decision. This decisive outcome draws upon the invaluable insights articulated by the reviewers while adroitly incorporating the Editor's own discerning suggestions and recommendations.

The culmination of this meticulous process is expected to be an intricate and comprehensive report presented to the authors, which encompasses:

  1. Scrutiny of Scientific Consistency
  2. Evaluation of Methodological Limitations
  3. Significance of Research Endeavor
  4. Appraisal of Linguistic Precision
  5. Examination of Figural and Tabular Precision
  6. Recommendations for Manuscript Enhancement

The onus of delivering this ultimate decree resides with the editor, who must adroitly substantiate any queries or concerns raised by authors pertaining to the review process.

Editors wield authoritative discretion to decline a manuscript submission should any apprehensions persist regarding the originality, lucidity, and relevance of the research vis-à-vis the esteemed journal's standards.