home submit paper guide for authors contact us register search archive current issue journal info
   [Home ] [Archive]    
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Articles archive::
For Authors::
Registration::
Contact us::
Site Facilities::
Editorial Workflow::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
:: Editorial Workflow ::

The following is the editorial workflow that every manuscript submitted to this journal undergoes during the course of the peer-review process.

Once a manuscript is submitted, the manuscript is assigned to an editor most appropriate to handle it, based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the editors. If the editor determines that the manuscript is not of sufficient quality to go through the normal review process, or if the subject of the manuscript is not appropriate to the journal scope, the editor rejects the manuscript with no further processing.

If the editor determines that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the journal, he/she assigns the manuscript to a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 external reviewers for peer-review. The reviewers submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor:

  • Publish: unaltered
  • Consider after minor changes
  • Consider after major changes
  • Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel

If the Editor recommends “Publish Unaltered,” the manuscript is accepted for publication.

If the Editor recommends “Consider after Minor Changes,” the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. The Editor reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript will be accepted.

If the editor recommends “Consider after Major Changes,” the recommendation is communicated to the authors. The authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the changes recommended by the reviewers and to submit their revised manuscript in a timely manner. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the editor can then make an editorial recommendation which can be “Publish Unaltered” or “Consider after Minor Changes” or “Reject.”

If the editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if two of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate.

The editorial workflow gives the editors the authority in rejecting any manuscript because of inappropriateness of its subject, lack of quality, plagiarism, or inaccurate results. The editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript submitted to the journal, since any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the editor in charge of the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the journal. The peer-review process is blinded.

View: 6672 Time(s)   |   Print: 1117 Time(s)   |   Email: 215 Time(s)   |   0 Comment(s)
::
ژورنال بین المللی پژوهش عملیاتی International Journal of Applied Operational Research - An Open Access Journal
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.046 seconds with 858 queries by yektaweb 3503