Peer Review Policy
GARI offers a good science of publish, so we practice peer review to ensure it. As a reputed scientific Journal, this objective practices all of the quality publishing articles. Our Multidisciplinary reviewer team plays a passionate role in maintaining a high standards Policy for peer-reviewed, as outlined below.
- The Chief-Editor's initial manuscript evaluation after his acceptance was admitted to the Double-Blind Peer-Reviewing system by the international review team; their expertise made the selection with the paper's core, and our database is continually being updated.
- The paper should be original and methodologically sounds and follow ethical guidelines then clearly present the Literature review, results, and innovative conclusions with suggestions get credit to the article, and finally, correct reference style had to use
- If there any comments to improve the article, will be informed to Author by GARI & Author should be correct those points and resubmit for further review is mandatory. (Language (English) modification is not part of the peer-review process, but reviewers may make suggestions to correct it)
- Time: To publish a better article review process take 04 weeks but depend on the Reviewer response first stage of review not take more than 06 weeks
- The Chief Editor's decision is final to accept or reject the article.
Guidelines for Reviewers
The Responsibility of the Peer Reviewer
The Reviewer should be responsible for analytically reading and assessing a manuscript as per their Subject area, providing courteous, beneficial. Truthful feedback to authors about their submission, those opinions offer to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article & how they improve the quality & stability and maintain the originality.
- Does the article sufficiently match your area of expertise? If not, feel free to contact the Chief Editor to find a relevant reviewer.
- The article should be review within 02 weeks, so check whether you have sufficient time to do it. The Answer is YES, carry on work but unfortunately, if you cannot match the deadline, contact Chief Editor ASAP.
- If you have any potential conflicts of interest, please do not hesitate to contact the Chief Editor.
The article should be aiming to Journal scope(s) & need to maintain Content Quality and Originality, All the date & interpretation able to understand, and the review process should be cover.
- Aims / Objectives Clearly Stated / Hypothesis
- Rationale of the study
- Quality of Literature Review
- Suitability of Methodology
- Results, appropriate analysis, Novelty of findings
- Discussion / conclusion explain how the research has moved the scientific knowledge
- References, Language
All suggestions have to keep trustworthy, and please do not discuss it with a third party. If there any discussion should be asking from Chief Editor but never encourage it and do not make any contact with Article Author(s).
- Plagiarism: We offer a 10% Plagiarism rate, but if you have any doubt the article is a copy of another one, let the Editor Know before further process it.
- Fraud: if you suspect the discussion or result untruthful, feel free to discuss it with the Editor
- Other ethical concerns: Ex - medical research, has there been a violation of animal or human subjects' accepted norms? Feel free to discuss it with the Editor
Complete "Reviewer Comment Document" & email the Editor.
The reviewer's recommendation and trustworthy feedback concerning an article will be strongly considered when the editors decide.