Editors have responsibilities toward the authors who provide the content of the journals, the peer reviewers who comment on the suitability of manuscripts for publication, the journal’s readers and the scientific community, the owners/publishers of the journals, and the public as a whole. The acceptance or rejection of a manuscript for publication is solely the responsibility of the Editor who has the final say. Failure to meet the criteria outlined may result in return of the manuscript for correction before evaluation. The manuscript is evaluated according to the following aspects:
- Originality of the work.
- Relevance to scientific knowledge in the field
- Background: Theoretical background adequacy, Hypothesis, objectives and clear contribution to the field, Updated and quality references.
- Methodology: Materials and methods appropriately and adequately described, Sound experimental design.
- Results: Data concise and sufficient, Statistical analysis when appropiate, Efficiency measurements, Figures clear and correct; only essential data should be included in figures. Elimination of figures, graphs and tables which add little or nothing could be replaced by a few sentences or a statement of numerical values is recommended.
- Discussion: In-depth discussion and correct interpretation.
- Formal Aspects: Correct language, References properly cited, High quality figures, Adherence to usual and consistent nomenclature, Title and summary sufficiently informative.
- Observe that the author(s) have followed the instruction for authors, editorial policies and publication ethics.
- Observe that the appropriate journal’s reporting guidelines is followed.
The review process is an important aspect of the publication process of an article. It helps an editor in making decision on an article and also enables the author to improve the manuscript. AshEse Visionary Limited operates a blind peer review process. Before accepting to review a manuscript reviewers should ensure that:
- The manuscript is within their area of expertise.
- They can dedicate the appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the manuscript.
- Reviewers should not rewrite the manuscript; however necessary corrections and suggestions for improvements should be made.
- Reviewers should only accept manuscript that they are confident that they can dedicate appropriate time in reviewing. Thus, reviewers should review and return manuscripts in a timely manner.
- Final recommendations [either accept, reject, minor/major corrections etc] should be backed up with arguments and facts based on the content of the manuscript.