Peer review process
All manuscripts are considered confidential. They are peer-reviewed by at least 2 anonymous reviewers selected by the Editorial Board. The corresponding author will be notified of the editor’s decision regarding acceptance or rejection of the manuscript or requiring modifications. An accepted manuscript is scheduled for publication in the next upcoming issue.
Peer review policy
All submissions to JIDAI are evaluated by an editor, who will decide whether they qualify to go through the peer review process. Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will go through the peer review process done by appropriate independent experts. Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ opinions and the result along with the reviewers’ opinions will be emailed to the authors. Authors should be well aware that even in case of one positive report by one reviewer, concerns raised by other reviewers might undermine the study and result in the manuscript being rejected if not corrected accordingly.
Authors are encouraged to suggest potential reviewers; however, the final decision is made by the Editor(s) whether to invite the suggested reviewers. Authors should not suggest colleagues working in the same department as themselves and should not knowingly provide false information in this regard. Authors have the right to exclude individuals as peer reviewers, but the reason should be clearly explained in their cover letter. Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this may hinder the peer review process.
In brief, a manuscript goes through the following steps in JIDAI:
1. Manuscript is submitted via the journal’s online submission system.
2. The manuscript is primarily checked by editorial assistants against the Check list, to make sure the manuscript conforms to the submission requirements. Cross-checking is also performed to see if there is duplicate submission or plagiarism. Manuscripts that do not meet the submission requirements will be returned to the authors for corrections and resubmission.
3. After ensuring that the manuscript meets the submission requirements, the editor in chief assigns editors for the manuscript after matching the subject of the article and the reviewer’s expertise.
4. Manuscripts lacking sufficient quality or those with a topic that is not well within the journal scope will be fast rejected without further consideration.
5. If the manuscript is worth further consideration based on the editor’s opinion, the editor will assign 2-3 external reviewers for peer-reviewing.
6. The peer-reviewers will send back their comments and recommendations as: accepted unchanged; minor revision; major revision; or rejected.
7. Based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor in chief will make the final editorial decision.
8. The peer-review process is single blinded. The reviewers are aware of whom the authors of the manuscript are but the authors do not know who the reviewers are.