Editorial Workflow

Review process considerations

ALDJ uses a double-blind peer review process. Editorial Board Members should organize and conduct a thorough peer-review of a submitted manuscript, to include the scope and the quality of the manuscript.

1. PRE-CHECK

Once a manuscript is submitted for publication, the manuscript will be reviewed by an Editor in Chief (most aligned with the topic) to ensure it is suitable for the journal and of sufficient quality for peer review. After the pre-check is complete, the manuscript is sent to two Executive Editors who are familiar with the topic, for review.

2. EXECUTIVE EDITOR REVIEW

The Executive Editors assigned to the submitted manuscript may review the manuscript themselves, or recommend two peer reviewers. Our editorial services department will then communicate with these external peer reviewers, and ensure timely review.

Note: If the manuscript is written by an Executive Editor, the manuscript will be handled and inspected by the Editors-in-Chief and vice versa.

3. PEER REVIEW

ALDJ uses a double-blind peer-review process, see also for more general peer review guidelines here

The external reviewers may or may not be from the list of potential reviewers suggested by the authors. The assigned Editorial Board Member reviewer can select at least two reviewers for a particular manuscript depending on the knowledge and experience of the specified reviewers.

A review report provides the Editors with feedback on the quality of the manuscript under consideration. It also supplies authors with explicit insight on how to improve their papers to make them suitable for publication in the journal. Although confidential comments to the editors are not relayed to authors, any remarks that may help improve the quality of the manuscript will be forwarded to the authors for their consideration. Reviewers are expected to provide advice on the following points in their review reports: