Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

Initial Screening:
Given the large volume of manuscript submissions, SLJM follows a policy of screening papers before sending them for full peer review. During the initial screening, journal editors mainly check the following:

  • Does the manuscript fit the journals' scope and ail and will it be of interest to the readership?
  • Is the manuscript of minimum acceptable quality? Is the content and writing good enough to make it worth reviewing?
  • Is the manuscript compliant with the journal's instruction for authors?

Peer Review:
Once the manuscript clears the initial screening, it is sent for peer review. SLJM follows a double-blind peer review process. Generally, a minimum of 2 peer reviewers are chosen for the peer review. SLJM has built a pool of peer reviewers that have a good track record of producing high-quality reviews who are also experts in their field.

The editorial board is vigilant in selecting reviewers who have sufficient subject matter expertise to do justice to the manuscript. Thus, highly technical papers or papers from niche subject areas may take longer to review, because it may take editors some time to locate appropriate reviewers.

The peer review is completed once all the reviewers send the journal a detailed report with their comments on the manuscript and their recommendation.

Final Decision:
The chief editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the decisions that are made:

  • accept without any changes (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper in its original form
  • accept with minor revisions (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections
  • accept after major revisions (conditional acceptance): the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors
  • revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes
  • reject the paper (outright rejection): the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions

Communicating the decision:
The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the editor would include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. However, where only minor changes were requested the follow-up review will be done by the handling editor.

Section Policies

Research

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Quick links