Acadlore boasts a highly professional team of editors for each of its journals. The editorial board members of every Acadlore journal are experts in the corresponding fields, and main close liaison with researchers and practitioners around the world. The rich reserve of professionals enables us to find suitable external experts for fast peer reviews of the works submitted for publication, with the aim of improving the work quality.
Moreover, Acadlore adopts a clear and efficient editorial process, which adheres to the strictest publication standards. In every link of the editorial process from the submission of a manuscript to its acceptance, Acadlore pursues the swiftest operation, without sacrificing the article quality. This is in line with our mission to make research openly accessible to the global audience as quickly as possible.
The following flowchart illustrates the editorial process from the submission of a manuscript to its acceptance.
Once an article is submitted, our professional managing editor will decide whether the article meets the publication ethics, fits the scope of the journal, and is scientifically sound. The decision will be made in consultation with experts in relevant fields. If the article is deemed as suitable, it will be sent for peer review. Otherwise, it will be rejected, or returned to the authors for revision and resubmission.
Once the article passes the initial assessment, it will be peer reviewed by at least two independent reviewers selected by the professional in-house editor. The reviewers are preferably experts in the relevant fields.
Potential reviewers suggested by the authors may also be considered. The reviewers must be independent from the authors and their institutions, qualified for evaluating the technical aspects of the article, and available to evaluate the article within the required period.
The peer review will be double blind, where the authors and reviewers do not know the identities of each other. At least two review reports are collected for each submitted article. Acadlore ensures that the peer review is efficient, rigorous, and fair for everyone involved.
Every article published in Acadlore journals go through a peer review by at least two reviewers. Review decisions are made by our academic editor, according to the reviewer comments on each article. The academic editor checks several issues before making a decision:
- Whether the selected reviewers are suitable;
- Whether the reviewer comments and author response are adequate;
- Whether the work is of high scientific quality.
Next, the professional in-house editor will communicate, via our own manuscript processing system, the review decision on your submission, which will be one of the following:
The article is rejected due to the technical objections raised by the reviewers, e.g., the lack of contribution of the research contents.
The article will have a good opportunity of being accepted for publication, after it is significantly modified according to the reviewer comments. The authors need to respond to the comments point by point, or provide a clear response if they disagree with some comments. Normally, only one round of major revision is allowed. The revised article will be sent to the reviewers for another round of review. The major revisions should be completed within a suitable period.
The article will be accepted for publication in principle, after it is properly revised according to the reviewer comments. The revised article will not be sent to the reviewers again. Our dedicated in-house editor will check if the revision is satisfactory, and the revised article meets the formal requirements. Five days are given for minor revisions.
The article is accepted without any further revision.
Paid language service
For non-native English speakers, Acadlore can provide translation and polishing service to facilitate the peer review, and improve the readability of their manuscripts. Experienced language workers will focus on the following aspects: improving sentence structure, improving flow, solving usage controversies, improving clarity and style, fact-checking, and addressing any errors or discrepancies in content.
Table of contents