Peer Review Process
All manuscripts received must be original and will be subject to a single-blind review process. Editors conducted an initial screening based on the Authors' Submission Checklist (Article Templates and Instructions). If the manuscript meets the basic journal standards, it will be proceeded with the peer review process. At least two independent reviewers will evaluate the manuscript. Based on the reviewer's report and recommendation, Editors may call for revisions before deciding whether to accept or reject the article. The Editors will weigh all views and may call for a third opinion if necessary. The final decision made by the Editors is unappealable. All submissions will be screened for plagiarism using TURNITIN.
Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editor-in-Chief will receive an email notification when a new manuscript is submitted to the open journal system. Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief makes initial judgment to the manuscripts, at this point manuscript may be rejected if not meet the basic journal criteria.
Peer reviews process
At least 2 reviewers will evaluate the manuscript, invited based on their expertise in the related field, proven by research track records (using researcher profiles in Scopus, Google Scholar, Mendeley, Publons, or ResearchGate). Reviewers are expected to provide an evaluation and comments within 2 weeks. If reviewers do not agree to review or not respond after 1 week, new reviewers will be invited. Reviewers will be provided with an evaluation form. Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief considers the reviews and determines whether to accept, reject, or request revision. The decision after the peer-review process will be sent to the authors if at least 2 reviewers have returned the review results. In a case of an editorial member submitting a manuscript, he/she must not be involved in the decision of the manuscript.
In the decision letter after the peer-review process, Editors provide recommendations on how to improve the manuscript along with the peer reviewers’ comments. The editors will make a revision request based on the reviewers’ comments or advice, which can be minor or major. In either case, the author has an opportunity to improve the manuscript and submit the revision for another consideration. Generally, authors will be asked to “submit a list of revisions completed” when resubmitting a manuscript. Authors will be given a certain amount of time ranging between 1 to 4 weeks, depending on the review reports. However, if the authors need more time, they could write to the editors asking for an extension. If the revisions are not submitted within time provided, the article will be archived.
Revised manuscripts may be reevaluated by Editors (as is often the case with the JATM) to ensure that all the peer reviewers’ comments have been properly addressed. Thus, it is important for authors to bear in mind that a journal’s request for revision does not guarantee an acceptance. Then Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief will make a decision upon the revised manuscript, which can be:
- Accepted, as it can be published directly
- Rejected, as it can be reevaluated after revision (generally, the manuscript has major technical problems, clarity of contents and presentation)
The authors will be sent a confirmation of acceptance for publication. If accepted, the authors will be sent an email about the next stages.
Copy-editing, layout and proofreading
Following acceptance, the manuscript will be copy-edited and typeset into pages. Authors may be asked to correct the manuscript according to the results of copy-editing. The authors will be sent PDF page proofs for comment and subsequent approval.
All accepted manuscripts undergo language editing. The partners of the Editorial Office will carry out English editing and proofreading services. However, if the editorial office must make extensive English corrections, the authors must have the manuscript professionally edited (an English language editing service that provides editing confirmation certificates).