Peer Review Policy

JGR uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. All manuscripts submitted for publication are peer-reviewed and published shortly after acceptance. The articles are subjected to strict plagiarism check and editorial peer-review by referees at the discretion of the editorial office. Every manuscript will be assessed by the editor for its quality, originality, plagiarism, grammar, suitability with Journal of Global Resources (JGR) editorial policies etc. Depending on reviewer recommendations, manuscripts may be sent back to authors for revision. After receiving the revised manuscript it is further checked for approval of changes. The peer-review process is an essential element of the publication cycle. All manuscripts submitted to Journal of Global Resources will undergo extensive peer review by our Editorial Board Members and double-blind reviews. All submitted papers will be reviewed by double blind peer review process which may take minimum 03 to 05 weeks from the date of submission. We advise all the author(s),  not to submit ‘the same paper’ to multiple journals. You should wait for review status of the paper in our Journal.

Journal of Global Resources (JGR) is committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted papers. To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undergo a rigorous review process. Characteristics of the peer review process are as follows:

1. Simultaneous submissions of the same manuscript to different journals will not be allowed.

2. Papers will be refereed by at least 2 or 3 experts (reviewers) as suggested by the editorial board.

3. Authors will be informed when Editors decide further review is required. All publication decisions are made by the journal’s Chief Editor on the basis of the referees’ reports (Reviewers report).

4. All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. All submitted papers will be reviewed by double blind review process.

5. All manuscripts submitted for publication in JGR cross-check for plagiarism software. Manuscripts found to be plagiarized during initial stages of review are out-rightly rejected and not considered for publication in the journal.

6. In case if a manuscript is found to be plagiarized after publication, the Chief Editor will conduct preliminary investigation, may be with the help of a suitable committee constituted for the purpose. If the manuscript is found to be plagiarized beyond the acceptable limits, the author will be black listed and statutory action will be taken as per law.

7. The author/s of received manuscripts are also asked to submit a declaration of original research work and copyright declaration of competing interests as part of their manuscript.

8. Manuscripts with contents outside the scope will not be considered for review.

9. Authors of papers that are not accepted are notified promptly.

Initial Evaluation

Once we receive a manuscript, our Editorial Office runs a plagiarism check and screens the manuscript to decide whether or not it should be sent for peer review. It is therefore very important for authors to make sure that their manuscript is well written and is of high quality. During the initial screening, our Editorial Office mainly checks the following:

1. Does the manuscript fit the journal’s aims and scope?

2. Has the manuscript been submitted or published elsewhere?

3. Is the content of the manuscript good enough to make it worth reviewing?

4. Is the manuscript compliant with the journal’s Instructions for Authors?

If the manuscript fails to meet the journal’s requirements, it will be rejected and the author would be intimated within 21 days after the last date of submission of papers.

Peer Review
After manuscripts clear the initial screening, they are sent to the Chief Editor. The Chief Editor assigns manuscripts to a Handling Editor (usually a member of the Editorial Board). The handling editor will send the manuscript to a minimum of 3 reviewers for double-blind peer review. Reviewers submit the evaluation results along with their recommendations as one of the following actions:

1. Accept

2. Minor Revision

3. Major Revision

4. Reject

Our journal acknowledges the researchers who have performed the peer-review and without the significant contributions made by these researchers, the publication of the journal would not be possible. For further information contact Nu Look Home Design, fairfax, virginia roofing company. We try our best to adhere to the guidelines laid out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We also forward the guidelines to our reviewers to ensure the highest ethical standards of evaluation.

Final Decision

In order for the Handling Editor to provide a recommendation regarding the manuscript, at least two completed reviews are required. Once the reviewers have submitted their comments, the handling Editor will be notified. The handling Editor will then send her/his recommendations to the Chief Editor. The Chief Editor delivers and informs the author of the final decision If the manuscript is conditionally accepted, author(s) will be required to revise their manuscript according to the Editor’s suggestions and submit a the revised version of their manuscript for further evaluation.