The IJCASCS editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
IJASCS Publication has all of the peer-reviewed journals. During the process of review, our editor first review a paper with online software to know the % of plagiarism then the approved the manuscript undergoes for reviewing with three random subject experts from the list of reviewers. Editor takes his decision after receiving reviewer comments from all three reviewers. The decision is based on the reviewer's approval and editor's own evaluation. The complete process runs through an online system which is designed to protect confidentiality of author's work. Editor has complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article, editor also not having conflict of interest with respect to articles he rejects/accept.
The policy established with the aim to publish and circulate quality research articles from various subjects. We have all peer-reviewed multidisciplinary journals with monthly and bi-monthly periodicity. Our review policy is solely objective process with vision to publish good scholarly and set proper and high standard practice of research writing. The process involves editorial board and reviewers who are experts from various subjects.
The review process begins with the manuscript submission by the author:
Initial stage primary evaluation of all manuscripts at the editor’s level to check following:
1.1 Suspicious originality of the subject matter
1.2 Considerable errors as per needs of the subject
1.3 Errors in language in terms of construction, grammar, lack of clarity, etc
1.4 Length of the article, structure and other necessary matters
2.1 The article, if accepted in the stage 1, the same is forwarded to the review.
2.2 We follow three reviewers blind peer review method for all subjects in anonymous mode.
2.3 The reviewers are selected on the basis of their academic expertise and area of interest of their research.
2.4 The reviewer basically focuses on:- Originality of the matter and academic ethics, discourage references without citation to the original author, structure of the article, significance of topic, statistical details and its requirement in the body of the article, presentation of the data, graphical presentation (if any), addition to the body of the knowledge in the subject, clear conclusion, etc.
Positive reply and recommendation by the referee would forward the article for further processing.
3.1 In case of suggestions and recommendations, the author is communicated the report and after satisfactory revision it is again forwarded to the reviewer for recommendation.
3.2 However, the editor’s decision is the final decision in terms of publication of the article.
3.3 The reviews are selected on the basis of their academic expertise and area of interest of their research.
3.4 The review process is time bound with clear and earnest aim and objective to publish quality articles for the subjects.