· Acoms Journal list      · Login    · Publisher Login
eISSN : 2508-7592    pISSN : 1738-2122   
Journal Information  l  e-Submission  l  View-FullText
Journal Information > Editor's & Reviewer's Guide
Journal Information
 · Introduction
 · Editorial Board
 · Author's Guide
 · Editor's & Reviewer's Guide
 · Contact Us
 · Research publication ethics
    
 

1.

 

The review process of a submitted manuscript is as follows. 

 

 

The Editor-in-Chief chooses an Editor (including a member of Editorial Board) in the subject area of a manuscript to select two or more reviewers.

 

 

The Editor asks two reviewers to review a manuscript (The reviewers can include a member of Editorial Board).

 

   

2.

 

The list of reviewers will not be disclosed.

 

   

3.

 

Review criteria are as follows:

 

 

A reviewer decides whether a manuscript follows the submission policy of JILT.

 

 

A reviewer checks overall originality, scientific logic and rationality of a manuscript including the rationality of the logic, the suitability of methods, the repetition and the over interpretation of results, the use of scientific terms, the validity of the discussion, the coincidence of the listed references and actually cited references and the agreement of results and abstract.

 

 

Any suggestion on a manuscript should be presented specifically (e.g. a page number and a line number).

 

   

4.

 

Reviewer’s comments will not be disclosed to anyone except the author.

 

   

5.

 

The manuscript status is divided into four: acceptance for publication as it is, acceptance for publication after minor revision, additional review after major revision, and rejection.

 

   

6.

 

When a reviewer admits that a manuscript belongs to one of followings, the manuscript is designated as being accepted for publication after revision or additionally reviewed after revision. The reviewer points it out specifically to the author to modify or supplement it. When the author submits a revised manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief checks the modification and supplementation, and accepts the manuscript for publication. If the author does not agree with some or all reviewer’s comments and makes written objections, it is reviewed by Editorial Board. But, if the author does not answer the reviewer’s comments, it is designated as being rejected.

 

 

A part not clarifying what the author does and what other does

 

 

A part of which content is absurd or unclear

 

 

A figure, a table or an explanation which is insufficient or unclear

 

 

Inappropriate expression

 

 

A part not following the submission policy

 

   

7.

 

When all reviewers decide that a manuscript is rejected, it is designated as rejection. When one of reviewers decides that a manuscript is rejected, a third reviewer is selected for additional review. If third reviewer decides that the manuscript is accepted for publication as it is or accepted for publication after revision, it is accepted for publication after completing revision. But, if the third reviewer decides that it is rejected, it is designated as rejection, and if the reviewer does that it is reviewed after revision, the final decision is made by Editorial Board

 

   

8.

 

When a same reviewer concludes more than two times that a same manuscript needs to be reviewed after revision, the manuscript is reviewed and decided by Editorial Board.

 

   

9.

 

When a reviewer admits that a manuscript meets one of following criteria, the manuscript is designated as being rejected. The reviewer should specify reasons for the rejection.

   

The content of a manuscript is not suitable for Journal of International Logistics and Trade

   

The content of a manuscript is not original or rational.

   

A finding or an idea in a manuscript is unclear, or the method in a reference or the discussion for an unknown finding is unclear.

   

All or some content of a manuscript has been previously published or accepted for publication by other journal or other publication or submitted or presented to it.

   

A manuscript does not follow the submission policy or it is considered not to be suitable for publication.

 

   

10.

 

Reviewers should complete their review, in principle, within three weeks.

 

   

11.

 

In principle, corresponding author of manuscripts should be notified the manuscript status based on reviewer’s opinion within one week.

 

   

12.

 

If reviewers do not submit their comments within one month, they would be discharged.