Policies
Policies
ONLINE publication model and Reprints
We strongly encourage the “ONLINE” publication model. But we also understand that some authors require “Reprints”. Reprints may be used to display the article’s potential at interviews, conferences, distribution to colleagues, seminars, other promotional activities, etc. Therefore, if required, reprints can be ordered here (Link). ‘Reprint Charge’ (RC) is separate from Article Processing Charge (APC) or Publication Charge.
Agreement for Authorship
Submission of a paper to this journal indicates that the author(s) have agreed on the paper’s content. One author should be indicated as the corresponding author for all publication related communications. All correspondence and proofs would be sent to the corresponding author, who will be treated as a final representative voice for all authors regarding any decision related to the manuscript unless otherwise requested during submission. This journal would not be responsible for any dispute related to the authorship of a submitted paper. Any change in the authorship (such as addition or deletion of author(s) or change in the sequence of author list) should be intimated to the editorial office through a letter signed by all authors before publication of the paper. In the absence of any signed letter, approval of ‘Galley proof’ by the corresponding author will work as ‘certificate of final agreement of authorship. Generally, any change in the authorship after final publication is not entertained, and COPE guidelines are followed for any dispute.
Peer Review Mechanism
All journals followed a strict double blindfold review policy to ensure neutral evaluation. During this review process identity of both the authors and reviewers are kept hidden to ensure an unbiased evaluation.)
Advanced OPEN peer review
We have migrated to a transparent and toughest ‘Advanced OPEN peer review system (Detailed general information is available in this link). High-quality manuscripts are peer-reviewed by a minimum of two peers in the same field. OPEN peer review system provides the provision to reveal the identities of the authors and reviewers to each other during the review process.
Reviewer suggestion
It is a prerequisite to submit the manuscript, the names, addresses, and e-mail addresses of 4 potential reviewers (When suggesting peer reviewers, please follow these guidelines to avoid any probable conflict of interest. Reviewer selection is a critical parameter to maintain any journal’s high peer review standard. During peer reviewer selection, many factors are considered, like proof of expertise in terms of published papers in the same area in reputed journals, affiliation, reputation, specific suggestions, etc. We try to avoid slow, careless reviewers or do not provide sufficient justification for their decision (positive or negative). Authors can also identify peers that they want not to review their papers. As far as possible, the editorial team respects requests by authors to exclude reviewers whom they consider to be unsuitable. As much as possible, we also try to rule out those reviewers who may have an obvious competing interest.
Post-publication peer review
Journal Web sites allow users to comment on articles to facilitate community evaluation and discourse around published articles. The comment section is mainly dedicated to promoting “Post-publication peer review”. Therefore, all journals strictly follow ‘pre-publication OPEN peer review’ and strongly encourage “Post-publication peer review”. As a result of this “Post-publication peer review”,
A – Users, who want to comment, are encouraged to register on the website. But if anybody doesn’t want to register, we’ll respect the decision. To honour ‘free flow of thoughts, ‘ unregistered users are also welcome to comment. Social login is also encouraged.
B – At the end of every comment, the user must identify the author by providing information 1. Full Name 2. Name of the Department, University, institute, etc. (This two information will be displayed publicly). We don’t like ‘anonymous’ comments. Comments with ‘forged identity’ will be deleted.
Portability of Peer-review
To support efficient and thorough peer review, this journal aims to reduce the number of times a manuscript is reviewed after rejection from any journal, thereby speeding up the publication process and reducing the burden on peer reviewers. Request from the author for ‘transfer of manuscript’ from one journal to another may also be accommodated under this policy. Under the cases mentioned above, by following the ‘portability of peer-review policy, the publisher will pass the review comments of a particular manuscript to the editor of another journal at the authors’ request. We will reveal the reviewers’ names to the handling editor for editorial purposes unless reviewers let us know when they return their report that they do not wish us to share their report with another published journal and/or that they do not wish to participate further in the peer review of this manuscript.
Special note for authors
As a part of restructuring all journals, we are closing all the manuscripts, pending dormant for more than 4 weeks after the final acceptance mail. Due to restructuring our editorial policy and regulations, we have closed all the files of these types of manuscripts. Files of these manuscripts can be kept alive if authors agree to a fresh round of peer review by at least two peer reviewers or re-approved by the present editorial board.
For any queries, authors are requested to contact by mail submission@scienceletters.org or editor@scienceletters.org