REVIEW POLICY

The RDA & RDRF Journals follows double blind review system where each submission undergoes review by a minimum of two domain experts. The experts are selected based on their domain knowledge and research experience including their publication and citation profile. A paper will be accepted ONLY if ALL the two reviewers recommend the acceptance with consistency. The journal use a very strong review scale which includes originality, novelty, methodological strength, experiments, data, inferences, analysis, presentation and language. The authors are clearly informed that the journal uses a very strong anti-plagiarism policy. The plagiarism is checked at many levels by different team which includes editors, sub-editors, reviewers and plagiarism detection experts. The journal requires the recommendation from reviewers on any one of the four decisions includes clear acceptance, major revision, minor revision and rejection. The papers which are recommended with major revisions are not accepted.

 

EDITORIAL-PEER REVIEW PROCESS

All manuscripts received are duly acknowledged. A manuscript will be reviewed for possible publication with the understanding that it is being submitted to the journal alone at that point in time and has not been published anywhere, simultaneously submitted, or already accepted for publication elsewhere. The journal expects that authors would authorize one of them to correspond with the Journal for all matters related to the manuscript. On submission, editors review all submitted manuscripts initially for suitability for formal review.

Manuscripts that are found suitable for publication in the particular journal are sent to two or more expert reviewers. The journal follows a double-blind review process, wherein the reviewers and authors are unaware of each other’s identity. Every manuscript is also assigned to a member of the editorial team, who based on the comments from the reviewers takes a final decision on the manuscript. The comments and suggestions (acceptance/ rejection/ amendments in manuscript) received from reviewers are conveyed to the corresponding author. If required, the author is requested to provide a point by point response to reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript. This process is repeated till reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript.

Manuscripts accepted for publication are copy edited for grammar, punctuation, print style, and format. Page proofs are sent to the corresponding author. The corresponding author is expected to return the corrected proofs within three days. It may not be possible to incorporate corrections received after that period. The whole process of submission of the manuscript to final decision and sending and receiving proofs is completed online. To achieve faster and greater dissemination of knowledge and information, the journal publishes articles online as ‘Ahead of Print’ immediately on acceptance.

PROVISIONS ON ARTICLE REVIEW

          The review procedure is applied to all articles submitted to the editorial board. The objective of a review is to promote rigorous selection of author manuscripts for publication and to make specific recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of a scientific article, determination of its compliance with the journal requirements and provides a comprehensive analysis of its strengths and weaknesses. Only the articles that have value from a scientific point of view and contribute to solving current economic problems and tasks are approved for publication. The level of compliance with the rules for preparing articles for publication in the scientific journal is evaluated separately.

          The main purpose of the review procedure is eliminating instances of substandard practice of scientific research and providing coordination and balancing of interests of authors, readers, the editorial board, reviewers and the institution where the study was carried out.

          The reviewing of manuscripts is held confidentially. By submitting a manuscript to the editors of the journal, the authors entrust to the editors the results of their scientific work and creative effort, on which their reputation and career may depend. The disclosure of confidentiality of the manuscript review violates the rights of the author. The editors do not report the information concerning the manuscript (including information on its receipt, content, reviewing process, criticism by reviewers and final opinion) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. A breach of confidentiality may only occur in instances of allegations of in authenticity or falsification of the material; in all other cases its preservation is obligatory.

          Responsibility for copyright infringement and non-compliance with existing standards in the material of the article rests on the author. Responsibility for verification of facts and data, the validity of the findings and recommendations and the scientific and practical level of the article rests on the author and reviewer.

 

 

**********