Editorial Policies

The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal via online submission system or by email. First the submissions are desk reviewed by the Editor in Chief. If it is passed in the desk review stage it is sent to two reviewers for double blind review. The reviewer comments and the recommendations are sent to the corresponding author for revision. If the recommendations of two reviewers are contradictory, a third reviewer will be assigned. The revised submission is checked by the Editor in Chief or by the reviewers and if the revisions are acceptable, the paper is accepted for publication. 

The review process will take upto 1-2 months based on the reviewer’s response.

Review Guidelines

The reviewers are asked to give their comments for the following topics related to the manuscript.

• Originality
  (Whether the paper contains new and significant information which contributes for the body of knowledge)

• Introduction
  (Background of the study, problem and objectives are clearly identified)

• Theory and Literature
  (Does a sufficient literature review is carried out and whether the literature review is align with the objectives/propositions, proper flow of argument is built, rational  behind the conceptual framework/hypotheses/propositions, whether and significant work is ignored)

• Methodology
  (Clear Justifications for the methods selected, in empirical papers appropriateness of sample section, data collection techniques, statistical models etc
  
  

• Results & Discussion
  (Presenting results in understandable way, sufficient discussion about results with previous literature)
  
  

• Title
  (Whether title clearly describe the article as whole?)
  
  

• Abstract
  (Whether abstract covers the content of the study)
  
  

• Tables, Figures, Images
  (Whether tables, figures and images are sufficient and appropriate, Are they easy to interpret and understand?)
  
  

• Language and scholarly writing
  (Whether proper language and scholarly writing has followed)
  
  

• Any other comments
  
  Based on the above comments the reviewer can recommend followings

  1. Accepted without revisions

  2. Accepted with minor revisions

  3. Accepted with major revisions

  4. Rejected