Acadlore is supported by a highly professional team of editors for each of its journals. The editorial board members are leading experts in their respective fields and maintain close collaboration with researchers and practitioners worldwide. This extensive network of professionals allows us to identify suitable external reviewers quickly, ensuring timely and rigorous peer reviews of submitted manuscripts with the goal of enhancing their quality.
In addition, Acadlore follows a transparent and efficient editorial workflow that adheres to the highest standards of academic publishing. From manuscript submission to final acceptance, every step of the editorial process is conducted with a commitment to speed and precision, without compromising the quality of the articles. This aligns with our mission to make research openly accessible to a global audience as efficiently as possible.
The following flowchart illustrates the editorial process, detailing the steps from manuscript submission to acceptance.
Manuscript Submission-to-Acceptance Process Flowchart
🔹 1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through Acadlore’s online submission system. During submission, authors must:
- Upload the full manuscript, figures, tables, and supplementary materials;
- Provide complete metadata (Title, Abstract, Keywords, Author Names and Affiliations, ORCID IDs);
- Agree to the publication ethics and authorship declaration policies.
Each submission receives a unique manuscript ID, and all future correspondence and status tracking occur through the system. Authors are encouraged to follow the journal’s submission guidelines to ensure a smooth review process.
🔹 2. Technical Pre-check
The Handling Editor (HE) conducts an initial screening to determine whether the manuscript meets the journal’s technical and formal standards. This includes:
- Plagiarism check: The manuscript is scanned using similarity detection tools (e.g., iThenticate) to ensure originality and prevent text reuse or self-plagiarism;
- AI-generated content assessment: AI content detection software is used to identify sections potentially generated by large language models or auto-translation tools, ensuring human authorship;
- Formatting check: The HE ensures that the manuscript follows the basic structural and formatting guidelines—covering title formatting, abstract clarity, reference style, figure/table placement, and section consistency;
- Language readability check: The manuscript must be written in clear, coherent English without signs of machine translation or unedited technical jargon.
📌 Manuscripts that fail any of these criteria are desk rejected and returned to authors without external review.
🔹 3. Academic Screening
The academic screening stage is overseen by an EBM or the ME and focuses on evaluating the manuscript’s scholarly merit and suitability. The key considerations include:
- Scope alignment: The manuscript must clearly fall within the aims and scope of the journal;
- Research design: The study must demonstrate a sound methodology, including clear research questions, appropriate data collection/analysis, and logical argumentation;
- Originality and contribution: The manuscript should offer new insights, theoretical advancement, or practical implications relevant to its field.
📌 Manuscripts failing this evaluation are rejected. Those that meet the criteria move forward to peer review.
🔹 4. Peer Review
Acadlore follows a double-blind peer review process. The HE is responsible for:
- Reviewer selection: At least two independent reviewers are invited for each manuscript. Reviewers may be EBM or recognized external experts in the field;
- Reviewer criteria: Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, publication track record, and institutional independence from the authors;
- Review reports: Each reviewer submits a detailed, constructive report with comments on originality, methodology, findings, references, and language;
- Review duration: Reviewers are given 2–3 weeks to complete their evaluations, and automated reminders are sent at regular intervals.
Review Outcomes:
- Minor revisions: If all reviewers suggest minor revisions, the revised manuscript will be re-evaluated by the HE for formatting and completeness—no re-review required;
- Major revisions: If any reviewer recommends major changes, the revised manuscript must be sent back to the same reviewers for re-evaluation;
- Multiple rounds: If disagreements or complex issues remain unresolved, the manuscript may undergo multiple rounds of review (R2, R3, etc.) until consensus is achieved.
🔹 5. Editorial Recommendation and Final Decision
After receiving all reviewer reports:
- The HE or ME drafts a recommendation memo based on reviewer feedback and manuscript revisions;
- The final decision is issued by an EBM, AE, or the EiC, depending on the complexity and sensitivity of the manuscript:
🟢 Routine submissions: EBM or AE can issue decisions;
🔴 High-profile or disputed submissions: final approval is made by the EiC.
The decision (acceptance, revision, or rejection) is communicated to the authors along with reviewer comments and, where applicable, editorial guidance.
Table of contents