Review process

 

Each submitted article is independently reviewed and if deemed suitable for CAJWR, it is sent to two referees for double-blind peer review.  One from Central Asia and one from outside the region. The reviewing process is supervised by an international editorial board with expertise in the region. Based on reviewers’ recommendations, it will be decided whether the paper should be accepted in the current form, revised, or rejected. 

The review should be completed in 1 month, but at the request of a reviewer, the deadline may be extended. The reviewer makes recommendations on the future of the article (every decision is justified): a) the article is recommended for publication in its present form; b) the article is recommended for publication after minor revision following reviewer’s recommendations; c) the article is recommended for publication after major revision following reviewer’s recommendations; d) the article is rejected from publishing in the journal.

The review with recommendations for correcting and revising the article is sent by the editor to the author together with a request to either consider them when preparing the new version of the article or provide a reasoned refusal. The revision of the article should not take more than 6 weeks from the date when the author was informed by the editorial board (by e-mail). The revised version of the article is re-routed for review. In case the authors refute to make a revision they need to inform the editorial board about their decision. If the authors do not return the revised version within three months following the date of the review, the editorial board withdraws the article and notifies the author about the decision. If the author and the reviewers have insoluble contradictions concerning the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to submit the manuscript for an additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the chief editor taking into account the opinions of the editorial board members. The decision to reject the publication following the reviewers’ recommendations is made at the editorial board meeting. After the article is rejected by the editorial board it cannot be re-submitted. The author is informed about this decision by an e-mail message. The positive review is not a sufficient basis for decision on publication of the article. The final decision is done by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the chief editor. Originals of reviews are stored in the office for 3 years.

Reviewers are considering the following aspects of the manuscript:

  • Does it address current scientific issues according to the scope of CAJWR?

  • Does it present new concepts, ideas, tools or data?

  • Does it have significant conclusions?

  • Are the scientific methods and assumptions correct and clear?

  • Is the description of experiments and calculations complete and accurate enough to be reproduced by fellow scientists (traceability)?

  • Do the authors clearly indicate their new/original contributions?

  • Does the title clearly reflect the content of the manuscript?

  • Is the overall presentation well-structured and understandable?

  • Are the quantity and quality of references appropriate?

Authors are encouraged to include a list of 3-4 potential reviewers with contact information (name, email address, affiliation).

The suggested reviewers must meet the following requirements:

a) the reviewer must be competent in the relevant scientific field;

b) the affiliation of the reviewer must be different from the first author;

с) the author and a reviewer should not have joint publications for the last 3 years.

 

Publication Alerts: