The African Journal of Applied Research operates a double-blind review process. The quality of manuscript content is assessed by the Associate Editor and a minimum of two additional independent expert reviewers. The handling Associate Editor sends invitations to individuals he/she maintains would be appropriate reviewers. Potential reviewers consider the invitation in light of their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability and are free to accept or decline the invitation. If possible, when declining, they may also suggest alternative reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of reviewers is obtained.
Review
The reviewers will rate several aspects of the manuscript, offer specific suggestions for improvement, and make a recommendation with regard to its suitability for publication. They are required to possess specific expertise in the field of the individual submission, have time to produce a report within the deadline established by the editor and to be devoid of any conflict of interest with the Authors or the content of the submission. They are expected to be balanced and consistently fair in evaluating papers and their reports should be analytical and constructive.
The review is submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject the paper or with a request for revision (major or minor), that should be well substantiated and justified.
If major issues are identified on first reading the manuscript, the reviewer may decide to reject the paper without further input. All information contained in the manuscript and acquired during the review process will be held in the strictest confidence.
Associate Editor evaluates the Reviews and makes a Decision
The handling Associate Editor considers all reviews received before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ considerably, the Associate Editor may invite additional reviewers in order to obtain further opinions before making a decision. The key parameters to be applied in the final evaluation of all types of submissions are:
- Innovation (Is the manuscript original? Does it provide new evidence or ideas capable of furthering knowledge in the given social-economic context?)
- Quality (clarity, logic, English language and grammar, thoroughness, layout etc.)
- Relevance (interest to readers, not too specific, applicability, the importance of the topic, impact on social life, economy, the scientific community, etc.)
Four possible decisions may therefore be reached:
- Accept – the manuscript satisfies all publication parameters and is worthy of publication
- Minor/Major Revisions – further revision of the manuscript is required in order to satisfy all parameters (a deadline for submission of the revised version is set)
- Reject and Resubmission Suggested – the paper fails to satisfy key parameters and substantial revision of the manuscript is required to address its shortcomings (no deadlines are set)
- Reject – the paper fails to satisfy key parameters and it is highly unlikely that further work can address its shortcomings.
Confirmation of the Decision and Communication to the Authors
All decisions are confirmed by the Editor-In- Chief prior to notification. The Editorial Office sends a decision email to the corresponding author including any relevant reviewer comments. All comments and related files will be provided in an anonymised form.
Final Steps
If accepted, the paper is sent to production. Reviewers will receive an email informing them of the outcome of their review. Detritus will make every effort to ensure articles are published rapidly and accurately: the corresponding author will receive an e-mail with a link to the online proofing system (implementation in progress), and he/she should submit all corrections within 48 hours. Following the implementation of the corrections and signing of the Copyright Assignment by the authors, the article is published online under the licence Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial – NoDerivs Alike (CC-BY-NC-ND).
If the article is returned to the authors for major or minor revision, the Editorial Office will provide constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article and set a deadline for submission of the revised manuscript. Whenever possible, the revised manuscript will be assessed by the original Associate Editor and by the original reviewers. Should only minor changes be requested this follow-up review may be performed directly by the Associate Editor.
If rejected, the paper is removed from the online system. Reviewers will receive an email informing them of the final decision.
Appeals
If the author believes that the editorial decision reached for the manuscript is not fair, he/she may contact the Editorial Office, stating the manuscript number and describing in detail the reasons for the appeal. The Editor-In- Chief will evaluate all requests and make a final decision, consulting the handling AE and revising the previous decision, if necessary.
Retractions
Articles may be withdrawn, retracted, removed or replaced after publication if they contain substantial errors that cannot be corrected by publishing an Erratum or a Corrigendum, or if ethical violations become known after publication. For more information, please visit our Publication Ethics https://publicationethics.org
