Peer Review Process for BAP Journals

All the manuscripts submitted to the BAP journals are accepted for consideration on the understanding that their contents have not been published elsewhere and are not under consideration by any other journal; are not plagiarized, duplicated, fabricated, falsified or any other such types not listed.

The peer review process is a crucial element in maintaining the high academic standards of BAP journals. It ensures the publication of quality research that contributes to the advancement of knowledge across various fields. Below is an overview of the peer review process for BAP journals:

 

Initial Submission and Editorial Review

    • Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system. Upon submission, the manuscript is first reviewed by the editorial office for completeness, adherence to submission guidelines, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

    • The editorial team checks for any immediate issues, such as plagiarism or significant methodological flaws, and decides whether the manuscript should proceed to the next stage. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic criteria may be rejected at this stage, or authors may be asked to make revisions before the peer review process begins.

    • Turnitin software is used to check for plagiarism, and any manuscript with a plagiarism level exceeding 30% will be automatically rejected. Manuscripts with a plagiarism level between 15% and 30% will be returned to the authors for revision and resubmission for further consideration.

 

Assignment of Reviewers

    • Once the manuscript passes the initial editorial review, it is assigned to a minimum of two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their qualifications, experience, and previous review history to ensure a balanced and fair evaluation.

    • Reviewers are typically chosen from the journal's reviewer pool, which consists of experts from various academic institutions and research organizations. To maintain the integrity of the review process, reviewers are kept anonymous to the authors (single-blind review) or both reviewers and authors are kept anonymous to each other (double-blind review).

 

Reviewer Evaluation

    • Reviewers are provided with guidelines and evaluation criteria to assess the manuscript's originality, methodological rigor, clarity, significance and contribution to the field. They are also asked to consider the manuscript's adherence to ethical standards, including the proper citation of sources and avoidance of plagiarism.

    • Reviewers will provide detailed feedback on the manuscript, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. They may recommend acceptance, minor or major revisions, or rejection. In cases where the reviewers' recommendations differ significantly, the editorial team may seek a third opinion or consult with a senior editor.

 

Author Revisions

    • If revisions are required, the authors are given the opportunity to respond to the reviewers' comments and make the necessary changes to their manuscript. Authors must provide a detailed response to each reviewer comment, explaining how the manuscript has been revised or providing a rationale if they disagree with certain suggestions.

    • The revised manuscript, along with the authors' responses, is resubmitted to the editorial office, where it may undergo additional rounds of review if necessary. Reviewers are often invited to evaluate the revised manuscript to ensure that their concerns have been adequately addressed.

 

Final Decision

    • After the peer review process is complete, the editorial team makes the final decision on whether to accept the manuscript for publication, request further revisions, or reject it. The decision is based on the reviewers' recommendations, the authors' responses and the manuscript's overall quality and alignment with the journal's standards.

    • Accepted manuscripts are then forwarded to the production team for copyediting, formatting, and final proofreading before publication. Authors are given the opportunity to review the proofs and make any final corrections.

 

Publication

    • Once the manuscript has passed through the final stages of review and editing, it is published in the journal's upcoming issue. Published articles are made available online, with open access option.

    • The entire peer review process is designed to be transparent, efficient, and rigorous, ensuring that the published research is of the highest quality and contributes meaningfully to its respective field.

 

Post-Publication Review

    • BAP journals also encourage post-publication review, where readers and other scholars can comment on the published articles. This process allows for ongoing scholarly dialogue and the continuous improvement of research quality.

 

Any complaints arising from the manuscript peer review process are addressed as per the journals complaints handling policy;

https://blueprintacademicpublishers.com/index.php/bap/appealsandcomplaints

 

Peer Review Time Frame

BAP journals permit rapid publication while retaining a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure that only the highest-quality research is published. The journal strives to speed the peer review process, and editors ensure that reviewer comments are accurately reviewed and understood considering any conflicts of interest that have been disclosed. Within 2 months, the Acceptance Letter and Review Results are made available to the writers. BAP journals are published on a continuous basis.

Any publication misconduct will be handled as per the COPE, CSE and ICMJE guidelines and any other approved guidelines