The publication of articles in Ann Publisher depends only on scientific validity and coherence assessed by our editors and/or peer reviewers who will also assess whether the writing is understandable and makes a useful contribution in their field. We appreciate the efforts and suggestions made by reviewers.
Initial Evaluation of the Manuscript
The editor will first evaluate all submitted manuscripts. Although rare, it is worthy of receiving outstanding manuscripts at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are not sufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, or are beyond the purpose and scope of Ann Publisher. Those that meet the minimum criteria will be forwarded to experts for review.
Types of Peer Reviews
The submitted text will generally be reviewed by a minimum of two experts who will be asked to evaluate whether the text is scientific and plausible, whether it is a duplicate of a published work, and whetherthe text is clear enough to be published. The method is blind peer review.
Review Report
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:
- Original by stating the purpose and loopholes clearly
- In accordance with the methodology.
- Follow appropriate ethical guidelines
- Have results/findings that are clearly presented and support conclusions
- Refer to previous relevant work
- Reviewers are not expected to proofread or copy text. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.
Decision
Reviewers advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Editors will make decisions based on this report and, if necessary, they will consult with members of the Editorial Board. The editor’s decision is final.
Become a reviewer
If you’re not currently a reviewer but would like to be added to your reviewer list, please contact us. The benefits of review include the opportunity to view and evaluate recent work in related research areas at an early stage, and to be recognised in ourlist of reviewers.