Workflow, Review and Criteria
The Guidelines for Authors can be downloaded here.
The submission criteria are as follows:
- The submission has not been previously published, nor is it under simultaneous consideration by another journal.
- The abstract contains (a) context/purpose, (b) approach/methods, (c) findings/results and (d) conclusion/key message.
- The instructions in the Guidelines for Authors have been followed.
- Citations and references are in APA style (American Psychological Association referencing style)
- The authors´names have been deleted from the text and do not appear in the file properties, to ensure a blind peer-review.
- The submission file is in Microsoft Word format.
Integrity and orginality check
Each submitted article undergoes first an academic integrity and orginality check. IJRVET uses PlagScan.
The extend to which a submission matches already published sources is indicated via percentages. The percentage is calculated by PlagScan. The decision after the integrity check is based on the following specific limits:
- 5% - 10% match: manuscript will be sent back to the author to revise the manuscript.
- > 10% match: manuscript will be rejected.
Each submitted article undergoes after the integrity check an initial screening by the editorial office (EO) and the editorial board (EB). Screening criteria are as follows:
- Compliance with the journal guidelines (EO)
- Integrity check (EO)
- Style and grammar (EO)
- Author has ensured the integrity of a blind review (EO)
- Ability to communicate to readers (EB)
- Soundness of its theory, methods and results (EB)
Double blind peer-review
Anonymised papers suitable for review are forwarded from the editorial office to at least two external reviewers not belonging to the editorial office or the editorial board. Review criteria are as follows:
- Ethics: The author has met research and publication ethics requirements.
- Relevance: The paper is within the scope of the journal.
- Theoretical framework: The theoretical framework is clearly presented and explained.
- Problem statement: The problem statement is clearly presented and explained.
- Research question: The research question is clearly presented and explained.
- Research methods: The research methods are appropriate and clearly presented.
- Results: The results are adequately and clearly presented and discussed.
The reviewers recommend with an overall rating:
- Minor revisions needed (neither accept nor reject)
- Major revisions needed (neither accept nor reject)
A third reviewer will be involved if the recommendations of the frist two reviews are contradictory. The final decision is made by the editor in chief.