Peer-review and publication policy

1. 1. Manuscripts submitted online (along with the copyright form) are initially checked for whether they are prepared according to the author guidelines. The rejection at this level is informed to the authors within five calendar days.
2. 
   2. Manuscripts screened through step-1 are assigned to the next level of editors (Associate Editors). Manuscripts rejection at this stage is based on the following findings:
   
   1. i) outside the aims and scope of the journal.
   2. ii) lack of originality.
   3. iii) have serious conceptual and/methodological flaws.
   4. iv) poor English language.
   The rejection along with the feedback by the senior editor at this stage is informed to the author within twelve days of assignment.
3. 
   3. The manuscripts screened through step-2 are then passed to minimum two expert referees for review.
   Type of peer-review: Double-blinded (i.e., the reviewers don’t know the identity of the authors and vice-versa)
   The selection of the reviewers is made based on their expertise, which matches with the paper. During the manuscript submission, authors are required to suggest minimum three suitable reviewers who are expert in the subject matter of the submitted manuscript. Authors should make sure that the suggested reviewers are totally independent and not connected to their work in any way. It is strongly recommended to suggest a mix of reviewers from different countries and different institutions. When suggesting reviewers, the Corresponding Author must provide an institutional email address for each suggested reviewer, or, if this is not possible to include other means of verifying the identity such as a link to a personal homepage, a link to the publication record or a researcher or author ID in the submission form. Please note that the Journal may not use the suggestions, but suggestions are appreciated and may help facilitate the peer review process.
   They are either selected through the referee database of the Journal or can be chosen from the author’s suggested list. In general, when the editor’s choice fails then only the referees are selected from the author’s recommended list.
4. 
   4. Reviewer reports : Reviewers will be asked to give their anonymous comments to the authors according to a given format. They can also send confidential comments to the editors. Reviewers are not expected to correct or copy edit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer-review process.
5. 
   5. Final manuscripts are passed to a typesetter who will prepare the camera-ready copy.
6. 
   6. This camera-ready copy will be sent to the authors for proof-reading. The author will send the proof-read copy within three calendar days.
7. 
   7. If a significant correction is suggested, then it will again go through the senior editor. For minor revision, the typesetter will do the corrections.
8. 
   8. The final manuscript is published online as the current issue in the Journal webpage along with the password-protected certificate of publication. Online publication is entirely free of cost.
9. 
   9. A few hardcopies copies are generated from the printing press as print-on-demand basis. The author would be asked to pay a minimum amount if he/she asked for hardcopy along with the postal cost.