Peer Review
Merit Research Journal employs a rigorous
peer review system. All submitted papers undergo a peer review
process before publication.
MRJ undertakes Double
Blind Peer Review Process
The review process is the most important aspect of the
publication process of an article. It enables authors to improve
their manuscripts and aids editors in making decision on
manuscripts. The journal employs a double-blind peer review
system. A double-blind peer review system is an anonymous review
system whereby the identity of the author(s) of a manuscript is
concealed from the selected reviewers. All details that may
enable a reviewer to identify the author(s) of a manuscript are
removed from the manuscript before the manuscript is sent to the
reviewer. Similarly, the reviewers’ identities are also
concealed from the author(s) when sending the reviewers’
comments to the author(s). Merit Research Journal considers the
double-blind peer system as a more effective review system
because it limits possible bias from either the selected
reviewers or from authors.
The Peer Review
Process
The journal employs a three-stage review process: editorial
office, external review and editors’ decision. The first stage
of the review process takes place in the editorial office. On
submission, a manuscript is reviewed to ensure that it meets the
minimum requirements of the journal before it is sent to
external reviewers. At this stage, the manuscript is reviewed
for the following:
Possible plagiarism
The manuscript is evaluated to compare the level of similarity
with other published works. The journal uses iThenticate
plagiarism detection system to achieve this goal. Manuscripts
that have high level of similarity with other works (including
the author(s) previous works) are rejected at this stage.
Authors are provided with the similarity report together with
the decision to reject the manuscript.
Scope: After a manuscript has undergone similarity check and the
level of similarity is judged to be appropriate, the content of
the manuscript is checked to ensure that it fits within the
scope of the journal selected by the author(s). In situations
where the content of the manuscript does not fit the scope of
the journal, the author’s consent is sought for the manuscript
to be transferred to a more suitable journal. A transferred
manuscript does not automatically translate to an accepted
manuscript in the receiving journal. The manuscript still
undergoes the usual peer review and may be accepted or rejected
if it is not suitable.
Recent references: The journal encourage authors to cite more
recent articles. Preferably, considerable number of the cited
articles should be works that were published within the last
five years.
English Language: Merit Research Journal currently publishes
full text of articles only in English language. The manuscript
is checked for the structure, organization, correctness and
clarity of the language as it adheres to the journal's
Instructions for Authors. The editorial office usually makes
correction to minor grammatical errors in such a manner that it
does not alter the manuscript. However, in situations where
language is substantially difficult to comprehend, the
manuscript is returned to the corresponding author to improve
clarity of the language. Manuscripts that fails in this first
stage of the review process are returned to the author(s) for
modification and resubmission. This first stage of the review is
very important as it enables the author(s) to improve the
manuscript at an early stage.
Once a manuscript successfully completes the editorial office
review process, it proceeds to the second stage. The second
stage of the review process employs the double-blind review
system. A minimum of three external reviewers are selected from
our database, editorial board of the journal or other sources.
These reviewers have expert knowledge of the subject area of the
manuscript. The reviewers are invited to review the manuscript
by sending them the abstract of the manuscript. Upon acceptance
to review the manuscript, the full text of the manuscript is
sent to the reviewers after the author(s) have been concealed.
Reviewers are required to evaluate the manuscripts and provide
useful comments to enable the author(s) to improve the quality
of the manuscript. Reviewers also score the manuscript in terms
of originality, contribution to the field, technical quality,
clarity of presentation and depth of research. Finally,
reviewers make one of the following suggestions about the
manuscript:
Requires minor corrections
Requires moderate revision
Requires major revision
Not suitable for further processing. In this case, the reviewer
provides specific reason(s) why the manuscript should not be
further processed.
Upon receipt of the reviewers’ comments, the editorial office
reviews the comment. If the three reviewers’ comment have
significantly different/or contradictory opinions about the same
manuscripts, the manuscript is re-sent to a fourth reviewer. All
reviewers’ comments (including the fourth reviewers’ comment
where necessary) are thereafter sent to the author(s). The
reviewers’ identities are concealed from the author(s). The
total time taken to complete the second stage of the manuscript
review dependent on the availability of the reviewers.
Using the reviewers’ comments, author(s) make corrections to the
manuscript and submits a revised manuscript. Upon receipt of the
revised submission, the manuscript undergoes the third and final
stage of the review process. The original manuscript, the
revised manuscript and all the reviewers’ comments are sent to
an editor of the journal. The editor reviews the manuscript and
makes one the following decisions:
Accept as it is
Accept with minor correction
Requires major corrections
Send revised manuscript for review again
Reject
Manuscripts that are accepted as it is are scheduled for
publication. Manuscripts that require corrections (either minor
or major) are sent to the author(s) to effect the corrections
suggested by the editor. After effecting the corrections, the
editor reviews the manuscripts again before the manuscripts are
accepted for publication. In some cases, the editor may require
authors to make corrections a second time. In other cases, the
editor may request for the revised manuscripts with (or without)
the additional corrections to be sent to a specific reviewer who
had earlier reviewed the manuscript before the manuscript can be
accepted for publication.
Merit Research Journals© 2021 || Advertisement | Privacy policy.