All manuscripts submitted for publication in the journal “Advanced Technologies” are sent for review only if they pass the initial evaluation regarding their form and thematic scope. A special care is taken that the initial evaluation does not last more than necessary.
Then they are evaluate on technical aspects and revision may be requested from the authors before the review process. Only the manuscript satisfying the minimum criteria is reviewed. Manuscript previously rejected by the Journal will not be reconsidered by the Editors and will therefore be rejected without review. Authors must strictly follow the Instructions for Authors. Additionally, the Journal ensures compliance by using plagiarism detection software.
Invitation to review
The reviewer will receive an email invitation from the journal that includes the manuscript abstract. In addition to availability, he has to consider whether the topic of this work is within his field of expertise and should answer for accepting or declining the invitation to review for seven days. If the reviewer cannot do the review, he should inform the editor-in-chief. Suggestions for alternative reviewers are always welcome.
Before agreeing to review
The reviewers should submit their comments within three weeks of agreeing to review a paper, although extensions can be granted. If the reviewer is not able to complete his work report within the agreed deadline, he should inform the editor-in-chief as soon as possible so that the evaluation process is not delayed.
Evaluation process
After the reviewers accept our invitation to review the manuscript, the editor will send him the manuscript and Evaluation form.
Advanced Technologies uses single-blind peer-review process for all papers. The reviewers’ identity is concealed from the authors throughout the review process, while the identity of the authors is known to the reviewers throughout the review process. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two reviewers. The reviewers act independently and they are not aware of each other’s identities. The reviewers are selected solely according to whether they have the relevant expertise for evaluating a manuscript. They must not be from the same institution as the author(s) of the manuscript, nor be their co-authors in the recent past. No suggestions of individual reviewers by the author(s) of the manuscript will be accepted.
The purpose of peer review is to assist the Editorial Board in making the decision of whether to accept or reject a paper. The purpose is also to assist the author in improving papers.
Manuscripts may be sent back to the authors for revision if necessary. During the review process, the Editor-in-Chief may require authors to provide additional information (including raw data) if they are necessary for the evaluation of the manuscript. These materials shall be kept confidential and must not be used for any other purposes.
Revised manuscript submissions should be made as soon as possible after receiving the referees’ comments (15 days).
If there are two negative reviews, the paper is rejected. The reviews are free and must be clear and objective.
The reviewers are obliged to inform the Editorial Board that the submitted paper can be:
– accepted for publication in the present form,
– accepted for publication with minor revision,
– accepted for publication with major revision or
– rejected.
Editors will make the final decision regarding manuscript status.