The Editor-in-Chief is a head of the journal and their discipline. They supervise journal activities, with the aim to ensure success of the journal within the scientific community.
The Editor-in-Chief handles the scientific quality and development of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief is expected to support connection to the Editorial Board and assist the Editorial Office in the management of the journal.
Editors/Board Members have a responsibility to support the integrity of the published literature, if needed, by publishing errata or corrections identifying anything of significance, retractions, and expressions of concern as quickly as possible. Editor must follow the policy guidelines provided by the publisher and fulfil the responsibilities bestowed upon with integrity.
Managing Editors propose journal development plan for Editor-in-Chief’s consideration, execute the plan after it is approved by the Editor-in-Chief, prepare journal development reports to the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board, identify important and interesting topics in the journal’s research field, commission high-quality articles, pre-screen new submissions before sending it to Academic Editors for pre-check, call Academic Editors’ attention to potential author/reviewer misconducts, draft short news and research highlights. Managing Editors assist all Academic Editors, monitor assistant and production editors, and overall push forward the journal.
Assistant Editors liaise with authors, reviewers and Academic Editors on manuscript basis, do light copyediting, organize peer review, report any suspected author/reviewer misconducts to Managing Editors, and assist Managing Editors in journal data collection.
The peer review process is an essential element of the publication cycle. All manuscripts submitted to AnaPub Publication Journals will undergo extensive peer review by our Editorial Board Members and blind reviews by two reviewers.
All manuscripts are processed using AnaPub Publications' in-house Manuscript Tracking System Ansis Manager. Once we receive a manuscript, our Editorial Office runs a plagiarism check using IThenticate plagiarism checking software 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:
If the manuscript fails to meet the journal's requirements, it is immediately rejected.
After manuscripts clear the initial screening, they are assigned to Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief assigns manuscripts to a Handling Editor. The handling editor will send the manuscript to a minimum of 3 reviewers for peer review. Reviewers submit the evaluation results along with their recommendations as one of the following actions:
We have a double blinded peer-review process in which the reviewers and authors do not have access to the information of who the authors and peer reviewers are. All our journals acknowledge 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. 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.
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 their recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief delivers and informs the author of the final decision.
If the manuscript is conditionally accepted, authors will be required to revise their manuscript according to the Editor’s suggestions and submit a revised version of their manuscript for further evaluation.
Our Editorial Workflow allows editors to reject manuscripts due to a number of reasons including inappropriateness of the subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of the results. We ensure high quality and unbiased peer-review by sending the manuscript for evaluation to a range of reviewers in different parts of the world.
If authors feel any inconvenience in the publication process, they may submit their complaints to firstname.lastname@example.org. The Editorial Office will address complaints regarding the journal’s policies and procedures and may forward the complaint to the respective journal’s Editorial Board, if required.