Every aspect of this process is performed online. Once a manuscript is received, the manuscript is checked by the editors to ensure that it is suitable to go through the double-blind peer review process. The topic should be relevant to the objectives of this journal, the format should be acceptable and the article well written. If the manuscript is lacking in some area it may be returned with comments from the editors for improvement before it can be sent for review.
A suitable manuscript is sent to at least 3 reviewers with the necessary and appropriate expertise. The reviewers will submit their reports on the manuscripts back to the editor with one of four recommendations.
• Publish without changes
• Publish after minor changes as recommended
• Review again after recommended major changes
• Reject manuscript as not acceptable, return to authors with reasons for rejection
For Publish without changes,” the authors will be notified of conditional acceptance. Once the fee is paid, the manuscript will be edited for proper English grammar by the journal’s editorial staff. As soon as the manuscript is finalized it will appear on the website as a downloadable PDF file, with no waiting until the current issue is completed.
For “Publish with Minor Changes,” the authors are asked to revise and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the recommended minor changes. If the final manuscript is acceptable in all aspects it is then published. If the authors refuse to make the changes as requested, the article may or may not still be published, but if it is, it will include a critique attached to it from the reviewers pointing out any questionable aspects.
If a majority of the reviewers recommend “Review again after major changes,” the authors are expected to revise their manuscript in accordance with the recommendations and to submit their revised manuscript within 30 days. The original reviewers will repeat the review process and make a new recommendation to accept, revise or reject. The Editors can override the majority decisions of reviewers to reject only if there is not a consensus. One of the objectives of this journal is to provide a voice to unpopular ideas that have been too often suppressed in the past, but allowing both sides of any question to be aired.
The editorial workflow gives the editors the authority to reject any manuscript because of inappropriateness of its subject matter, lack of scientific quality, or failure to follow scientific principles. The Editors cannot assign themselves as exclusive reviewers of a manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased double-blind peer-review process for every manuscript submitted to the journal. Every manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the editor in charge of the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the journal.