Peer Review Process AUHDAP Journal

The articles submitted for publication to the AUHDAP Journal are peer-reviewed and subject to scientific review.

There are two (2) phases to the blind peer review process: internal peer review and external peer review. The primary goals of the blind peer review process are to determine whether an article should be published and to improve it before publication with the assistance of our top reviewers.

 

Internal Peer review

After registering the article proposed for publication in the journal, the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial team review the article. An editor is assigned to guide and supervise the entire process.

The designated editor uses Plagiarism Detector, an anti-plagiarism program, to scan the article.  The papers that do not exceed 20% of information taken from other sources are sent further for external review. For further details, access the program’s website.

The article will be examined further in terms of the following if it passes the scanning process:

      ·       the scientific level of the approach;

      ·       thematic importance;

      ·       clear expression of ideas;

      ·       originality of the topic and its degree of novelty;

      ·       clear formulation of conclusions;

      ·       compliance with technical norms (title and summary in English and bibliography with the English version of the titles).

The paper is sent for external blind peer review if it passes the internal peer review procedure.

Articles considered unacceptable for the journal's profile or for the general scientific interest will be rejected without being subject to external peer review.

External Blind Peer Review Process

The designated editor sends to reviewers based on their subject-matter competence and lack of conflict of interest. The article is assigned to a minimum of three reviewers. The reviewers are given access to the entire paper, a deadline, and a review form.

The author's data is not accessible to the reviewers. The author or authors of the article are also unaware of the names of the reviewers.

The designated reviewer evaluates the paper using the following criteria:

• quality;

• uniqueness;

• significance.

The decisions about whether to publish or not will be communicated to the author within 30 days starting from the day of the article's submission.

One of the following decisions—accepting the paper, requesting adjustments, or declining it—is sent to the authors via email following the review process.

The entire process is accessible to the designated editor.

Depending on the results, the author is required to adhere to the email instructions.

In the event of an “accept submission”, the author must email the final article along with all of the author's data in accordance with the template by the specified deadline.

For “request revisions,” the author must make the necessary changes and submit the final article to the editor as directed. 

The author may resubmit the paper after making revisions in the event of a “decline submission.”