For Reviewers
After the initial assessment, the manuscript will be sent to reviewer for formal review. Both internal (from the journal board) and external reviewer may be utilized during the evaluation process. In every stage of the process, the double-blind peer review process, in which the names of the reviewers and the authors are not disclosed, will be used.
Appropriate reviewers selection for the relevant manuscript is the responsibility of the chief- or the section editor appointed by the chief editor. Reviewer choice is based on multiple factors, including the research topic, research methodology, reviewer expertise and experience, specific recommendations, and availability of reviewer.
The primary purpose of the peer review is to provide editor with the information needed to reach a right decision for publication. After considering the reviewer evaluation reports, editor will make one of the following decisions: Accept, Request a minor revision, Request a major revision, Reject. Upon submission of a revised-corrected manuscript, the editor may wish to ask the original reviewer for further advice.
Reviewers must follow COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers prepared by the COPE.
Please click here for more information on the responsibilities of the reviewers.
Acarological Studies is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.
International Scientific Research Journal on Acarology