1. Introduction: The ABUAD International Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences (AIJNAS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of quality and integrity in the publication of scientific research. The peer review process is a critical component in ensuring the accuracy, relevance, and significance of the manuscripts we publish. This policy outlines the procedures and guidelines for the peer review process at AIJNAS.
2. Objectives of Peer Review
• To assess the originality, significance, and rigour of the research.
• To ensure that the research methodology is sound and appropriate.
• To provide constructive feedback to authors to improve the quality of their manuscripts.
• To assist the editorial team in making informed decisions regarding publication.
3. Types of Peer Review: AIJNAS employs a double-blind peer review process:
• Double-blind Review: Both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other to ensure impartiality and objectivity.
4. Submission and Initial Screening
• Initial Screening: Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors will perform an initial screening to ensure the manuscript aligns with the journal's scope and meets basic quality standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria will be returned to the authors without external review.
• Plagiarism Check: All manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism using advanced plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with significant plagiarism issues will be rejected outright. The editors of this journal enforce a rigorous peer-review process together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure and to add high-quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Therefore, any manuscript with similarity index higher than 20% will not be sent out for review and will be declined for publication.
5. Selection of Reviewers
• Reviewer Database: Reviewers will be selected from a database of qualified experts in the relevant fields. The database will be regularly updated to include reviewers with diverse expertise and backgrounds. Reviewers can also be drawn from users of the journal who indicated their interest to serve as a reviewer.
• Reviewer Invitation: Potential reviewers will be invited based on their expertise, publication history, and previous review performance. Invitations will include the manuscript title, abstract, and an estimated timeline for the review.
6. Review Process
• Review Guidelines: Reviewers will be provided with detailed guidelines and a review form to ensure comprehensive and consistent evaluations. The review form will cover aspects such as originality, methodology, significance, clarity, and ethical considerations. A minimum of two reviewers will be assigned to a paper for a thorough assessment of the scientific quality and rigour of the manuscripts.
• Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript and associated materials as confidential documents. They should not share or discuss the content with anyone outside the review process.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from the review if necessary.
7. Reviewer Recommendations: Reviewers will make one of the following recommendations:
• Accept without revisions
• Accept with minor revisions
• Revise and resubmit (major revisions)
• Reject
8. Editorial Decision
• Decision Making: The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors will consider the reviewers' recommendations, comments, and the authors' responses to make a final decision.
• Communication: Authors will be notified of the decision, including constructive feedback and any necessary revisions. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation if required.
9. Appeals and Revisions
• Appeals: Authors who wish to appeal a rejection decision must submit a detailed response addressing the reviewers' and editors' comments. The appeal will be reviewed by the editorial team, and a final decision will be made.
• Revisions: Authors are required to address all reviewers’ comments in their revisions and provide a point-by-point response outlining the changes made.
10. Ethical Considerations
• Ethical Guidelines: AIJNAS adheres to the ethical guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Reviewers and authors are expected to comply with these guidelines.
• Misconduct: Any allegations of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication, plagiarism) will be investigated thoroughly, and appropriate actions will be taken in accordance with COPE guidelines.
11. Reviewer Recognition
• Acknowledgment: AIJNAS recognises the valuable contributions of reviewers by acknowledging them in the journal and offering certificates of appreciation.
• Performance Monitoring: Reviewers' performance will be monitored, and those who consistently provide high-quality reviews will be recognized and potentially invited to join the editorial board.
12. Continuous Improvement
• Feedback: AIJNAS seeks feedback from reviewers, authors, and readers to continually improve the peer review process.
• Training: Periodic training sessions and resources will be provided to reviewers to ensure they are equipped with the latest best practices in peer review.