Guidelines for Reviewers

The reviewers make an objective, impartial evaluation of scientific merits of the manuscript. Reviewers who are on the panel of the journal are invited to accept the invitation to review an article related to their research interests. At that stage, reviewers are also requested to disclose any potential conflict of interest. The reviewers are provided a detailed Review Proforma to give their feedback for the improvement.  

1.      Quantitative Measures (rate each aspect of the article from 1=poor to 10=excellent). The aspects like scope, adequacy of background and literature review, appropriateness of research design, accuracy of analysis and results, clarity of presentation and language, consistency of references, and the organization of the article.

2.    Qualitative Measures (Provide detailed feedback regarding originality, relationship to literature, methods explanation, implications, quality of communication, and comments for authors. Reviewers are optionally encouraged to provide comments for editors.  

If a manuscript is believed to not meet the standards of the journal or is otherwise lacking in scientific rigor or contains major deficiencies, the reviewers will attempt to provide constructive criticism to assist the authors in ultimately improving their work. If a manuscript is believed to be potentially acceptable for publication but needs to be improved, it is invited for reconsideration with the expectation that the authors will fully address the reviewer’s suggestions.

Once all reviews have been received and considered by the Editor, a decision letter to the author is drafted. There are several types of decisions possible:

§  Accept without revision

§  Minor revision

§  Major revision

§  Reject

Reviewers are highly encouraged to join the mission of the JOCCD to promote research culture by registering themselves through the link.