|International Editorial Board|
|ISSN and Licensing|
|Indexing and Abstracting|
|Instructions for Authors|
|Peer Review Process|
DOUBLE BLIND PEER REVIEW POLICY:
Research Plus Journals (RPJ) strive hard to maintain the highest standards set by the internal code of conduct for double blind peer review through an efficiently review handling process. The highlevel workflow of the followed review process is highlighted in the below flow chart (Image Credit: Scholarly Journal Publishing Guide, Resources for McGill journal editors)
All research articles published in a RPJ undergo full peer review, key characteristics of which are listed below:
Peer review of referred papers:
Editors of RPJ will decide promptly whether to accept, reject, or request revisions of referred papers based on the reviews and editorial insight of the supporting journals/conferences/research forums. In addition, Editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. Authors will be advised when Editors decide further review is needed.
Peer review of novel submissions:
Articles submitted directly to a RPJ will be fully peer reviewed by at least two appropriately qualified experts in the field selected by the Chief-Managing-Editor/Editors-in-Chief. The Chief-Managing-Editor/Editors-in-Chief or a designated member of the Editorial Board will then decide whether to accept, reject or request revisions based on the reviews and comments received.
Editors will decide whether each submission reports well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper. Assessments of priority will not be a factor in decision-making, but all papers must make an incremental or novel addition to the literature and betterment of research community.
All final decision related to the publication of a specific article/issue/volume in this journal is with the Chief Managing Editor of RPJ. This decision will be based on different evaluation parameters namely but not limited to the decision of the EIC, review recommendation by reviewers, content appropriateness, copy right, ethics etc.