PEER REVIEW POLICY
After submission all articles are evaluated by the editorial office. In an effort to streamline the reviewing process, some articles may be immediately desk rejected, if they are considered to be out of the journal’s scope or otherwise unfit for consideration. Articles which pass the initial evaluation will be sent out for external review. In 2-3 days, the authors will receive an acknowledgement of status of their article (if the article was sent for review or was desk rejected).
Following the brief editorial review to determinate the manuscript’s appropriateness for ARAS, each manuscript will be blind reviewed by two reviewers. The review process will take approximately 3 months. The reviewers will evaluate the submitted papers against the following checkpoints:
- Relevance to ARAS
- Significance, usefulness
- Reference to the related literature
- Linguistic quality.
Attached is the structure of the review form.
At the end of the review process authors will be notified on the status of their manuscripts (accepted, minor/major revisions, or rejected) and will receive the feedback from the reviewers. Revised articles will be sent out for review again, depending on the level of revision requested. The article will be screened for plagiarism after the reviewers acceptance.
All papers will be published open access under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 licence. This ensures that they receive the maximum dissemination because there are no barriers to access. This licence allows readers to disseminate and reuse the paper, but always requires them to grant the authors and the first publication full credit.
There is no fee for publication.
The corresponding author, at no cost, will receive a PDF file of the article via e-mail.
The journal is indexed in the following databases: