Peer Review Policy

Peer review is a critical process of GEO Academic Journal (GAJ) to ensure the quality and integrity of the published research articles. The manuscript should adhere to the following standards:

1. Significance: The manuscript should present new and significant research findings that advance knowledge in the field. The research should address an important research question or gap in the literature and have implications for theory or practice.

2. Originality: The manuscript should be original and innovative, presenting new insights or approaches to the research topic. It should avoid repeating existing research or findings.

3. Methodology: The manuscript should use appropriate research methods, data collection techniques, and data analysis methods. The methods used should be clearly described and appropriate for the research question and data collected.

4. Results: The results should be clear, well-organized, and supported by the data presented. The authors should avoid over-interpreting the results or making claims that are not supported by the data.

5. Discussion and conclusions: The discussion and conclusions should be well-supported by the data presented, and should relate back to the research question and objectives. The authors should avoid making generalizations or extrapolations beyond the scope of the study.

6. Writing style and presentation: The manuscript should be well-written and well-presented, with clear and concise language, correct grammar, and appropriate use of figures and tables. The authors should follow the journal’s guidelines for formatting, referencing, and citation style.

7. Contribution to the field: The manuscript should make a significant contribution to the field, either by presenting new findings, challenging existing theories or concepts, or proposing new models or frameworks. The authors should clearly articulate the contribution and its significance to the field.
8. Ethical considerations: The manuscript should conform to ethical guidelines for research and publication, including obtaining informed consent from study participants, avoiding plagiarism and self-plagiarism, and avoiding conflicts of interest.

9. References: The references cited in the manuscript should be recent, relevant, and from reputable sources. The authors should provide a comprehensive and balanced review of the literature relevant to the research question.

10. Fit with the journal’s scope and focus: The manuscript should be aligned with the scope and focus of the journal, and contribute to the journal’s mission and goals. The authors should demonstrate that their research is relevant to the journal’s audience and will be of interest to its readership.

The following is a policy for the peer review process implemented by GAJ:

Peer Review Process and Responsibilities

1. Editorial Responsibility: The editor-in-chief of the journal is responsible for the overall editorial process and final decision-making of all submissions.

2. Selection of Reviewers: The editor-in-chief selects appropriate reviewers with relevant expertise in the field. The reviewers should have no conflict of interest with the author(s) or the research topic.

3. Reviewer Invitation: The editor-in-chief invites reviewers to participate in the peer review process, including a brief explanation of the purpose of the review, the manuscript title, and the deadline for review.

4. Review Guidelines: The reviewers are provided with guidelines for the review process, including the evaluation criteria, the expected length of the review, and the deadline for submission.

5. Double Anonymous Review: The review process is conducted anonymously. The reviewers do not know the identity of the author(s) and the author(s) do not know the identity of the reviewers.

6. Review Process: The reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on the established criteria and provide constructive feedback to the author(s) to improve the quality of the manuscript.

7. Reviewer Recommendations: The reviewers make recommendations to the editor-in-chief based on their evaluation of the manuscript. These recommendations include acceptance, revision, or rejection.

8. Revision Process: If revisions are recommended, the author(s) revise the manuscript and resubmit it to the journal. The revised manuscript is then reviewed again by the original reviewers or new reviewers.

9. Final Decision: The editor-in-chief makes the final decision on whether to accept, reject or ask for further revisions based on the reviewers’ recommendations and the author’s revisions.

10. Feedback to the Author(s): The author(s) receive feedback on their manuscript, including any suggestions for improvement made by the reviewers.

GAJ  ensures a transparent, objective, and rigorous peer review process that upholds the quality and integrity of research articles.