Review Policy

Reviewers

A reviewer may be an academician, a scientist, a researcher having strong hold in his/her subject domain. Such person is mandatory to have a regular position in any organization/institution. The reviewer(s) for an article that under consideration for publication will be selected by the editorial board members based on their expertise which is purely confidential for both author and reviewer. There is list of reviewers selected by the board members on different subject. However if some renowned person wanted to associated with the journal as a reviewer may submit his/her curriculum vitae (bio-data) to the Editor-in-Chief (senhri@pucollege.edu.in). For this purpose kindly refer to the “Editorial Board” page. But the decision will be based on the recommendations from the editorial board members.

Prior to review, the nominated reviewers have to consider the following condition:

  • The subject/topic of the article should be matching with the specialization of the reviewers
  • The reviewer(s) should have sufficient knowledge in order to review the article in case of any specialized topic
  • Availability of sufficient time to review the article
  • Any conflict of interest? For any unacceptable components/findings or disagree to accept by the reviewer may kindly reject to review the article. 

If the above conditions are fulfilled for a reviewer then only should accept the request for review. Rejection for any reason may request to inform the editor as soon as possible preferably within 15 days. It is expected to receive the reviewer’s comment within 30 days from the date of assignment.

Journal Ethics

Senhri is strongly followed the journal ethics. The articles should be original work by the authors which should not submit elsewhere for publication. The research work should carry out only by the authors of the article. The submitted article should be plagiarism free i.e. the similarity index should not cross 10% (as per the UGC norms). Reviewers are provided a copy of similarity index report generated by the editorial board along with the manuscript. However the reviewers have full right to check the similarity index by his/her own. Reviewers are requested to look very carefully in order to avoid the plagiarism and whether the authors properly gave the citation or not (both in-text and reference section). For any un-ethical condition the reviewer has full right to reject the assigned article for publication. 

Reviewing Policy

The general guidelines to review the assigned manuscript which is laid out as under. The reviewer will examine:

Review ComponentsRemarks
If there the paper meets the general guidelines of the journal- e.g. An article should have abstract of not more than 200 words, with 4/5 keywords, maximum word limit is 6000, minimum 2000, etc. 
Similarity Index (maximum permissible limit: 10% ) 
If the paper clearly reflects its contents/ or if the title is appropriate. 
If the content of the manuscript is relevant to academic readership. 
If the author(s) reviewed the existing literature adequately. 
If the references followed the journal’s formatting style (APA format). 
If all the references cited are in the reference list and vice versa. 
If the method of study applied in the paper is accurate. 
If the tables (if any) are necessary, understandable and in the right format. 
If the images (if any) are clear enough. 
If there is a proper conclusion and if the conclusions are supported by the data. 
If the manuscript is well organized.  
Any other issue(s)? Kindly also mention the points to be corrected in case of revision. 

Decision from the Reviewer

Based on the above criteria’s the Manuscript is:

Acceptability/RevisionDecisionComments
AcceptableYes / No
RejectYes / No
RevisionRequired / Not Required

An Appreciation to the Reviewers

After the review process is over, the editorial board used to send a certificate of appreciation to all the reviewers. Senhri is highly appreciated for paying their valuable time in the growth of the journal. For any comment and or suggestion is a matter of concern in order to improve the quality of the journal. Senhri always welcome such comments.