For Reviewers

The journals of Global Graduate and Postgraduate Research accept wide range of submission for peer review; therefore, to better select manuscript for publications, the Editorial board of Global Graduate and Postgraduate Research looks for the following criteria that must be met for a manuscript to be considered for publications

All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff; manuscript that meet the above criteria will be sent for formal review. Manuscripts with language problems will be sent back to the authors for English editing.

All reviews will be done anonymously; however, Global Graduate and Postgraduate Research may publish the review reports and the authors point-by-point responses alongside the manuscript.

All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff; manuscript that meet the above criteria will be sent for formal review. Manuscripts with language problems will be sent back to the authors for English editing.

Submitting authors provide the name and contact information of 5 potential reviewers; typically, 3 reviewers will be selected for the review process. The editors then decide, based on the reviewers’ advice, from among several possibilities:
Accept, with or without editorial revisions
Invite the authors to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before a final decision is reached
Reject, but indicate to the authors that further work might justify a resubmission
Reject outright, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems
Referees are welcome to recommend a particular course of action, but the editors will make the final decision. Editorial decisions are not a matter of counting votes or numerical rank assessments, and we do not always follow the majority recommendation. Our primary responsibilities are to our readers and scientific community, and in deciding.

Confidentiality

We ask referees to treat the review process as strictly confidential, and not to discuss the manuscript with anyone not directly involved in the review.

Comments intended for the authors are transmitted regardless of what we may think of the content. However, we may edit the report to remove language that may come across as offensive. Referees should avoid offence rhetoric.

Manuscript revisions will also be sent to the reviewers for additional assessments. Reviewers will be informed of the editorial decision on the manuscript despite their negative recommendation. Referees who are overruled should realize that this does not imply any lack of confidence in their judgment.

For rapid and easy review process, reviewers will be sent a review report template alongside the manuscript. Reviewers will be asked to rate the manuscript and leave comments where appropriate.

Referees whom the authors excluded, for whatever reason, will be avoided. Referees with recent or ongoing collaborations with the authors will also be avoided. It is not possible for the editors to know of all possible biases, however, so we ask referees to draw our attention to anything that might affect their review, and to decline to review in cases where they feel unable to be objective.

Comments intended for the authors are transmitted regardless of what we may think of the content. However, we may edit the report to remove language that may come across as offensive. Referees should avoid offense rhetoric.