MANUSCRIPT PROCESSING WORKFLOW

ANJLMS ensures rigorous scientific integrity through a comprehensive editorial screening and double-blind peer review structure aligned with COPE, ICMJE, and applicable academic and ethical standards.

Initial Editorial Decision
Within 15 Days
Peer Review Timeline
06 – 08 Weeks
Editorial Acceptance Track
08 – 12 Weeks

Editorial Framework & Double-Blind Peer Review

The ANJLMS operates under a Double-Blind Peer Review System to protect the integrity of evaluations. Authors remain completely anonymous to reviewers, and reviewers remain completely anonymous to authors. Editorial staff ensure appropriate structural and identifying information is anonymized before manuscripts are routed for external evaluation.

Reviewers and editors evaluate submissions solely based on scientific validity, originality, methodological depth, ethical compliance, and direct relevance to the journal's scope, independent of author nationality, affiliation, gender, or ethnicity.

Manuscript Processing Workflow Steps

Step 1: Manuscript Submission

Authors upload materials through the OJS digital workspace. Submissions must strictly contain complete file configurations alongside verified declarations covering active authorship parameters, institutional ethics approval where applicable, conflict-of-interest disclosures, funding information, and relevant data availability.

Step 2: Initial Editorial Screening & Technical Assessment

The Editorial Office executes systematic preliminary checks to verify scope, author-instruction alignment, file integrity, reporting specifications, and methodological foundations. Originality validation may be conducted using appropriate similarity-detection software. Manuscripts identified as having substantial similarity or fundamental ethical non-compliance may be returned to authors for correction or rejected at the editorial screening stage.

⏱ Processing Ceiling: Completed within 0–8 days from initial submission log.

Step 3: Comprehensive Editorial Assessment & Initial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Handling Editor checks the work for novelty, scientific importance, design rigor, methodological appropriateness, and overall suitability for ANJLMS. At this checkpoint, manuscripts are either advanced to peer review, returned to authors for pre-review revisions, or formally desk rejected.

⏱ Hard Processing Target: Final Initial Editorial Decision is issued within 15 days.

Step 4: Independent Reviewer Selection

Advanced manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent external expert reviewers matching the relevant subject area. Editors prioritize qualified experts to ensure appropriate scholarly evaluation. Reviewers must declare the absence of personal, financial, or institutional conflicts before accessing anonymized manuscript materials.

Step 5: Double-Blind Evaluation Loop

Assigned reviewers objectively analyze study design, data interpretation, ethics, methodology, originality, and clarity to issue a formal publication recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

⏱ Processing Window: Active evaluation loops are maintained between 04–08 weeks.

Steps 6 & 7: Editorial Recommendation & Author Revision Tracking

Reviewer reports are anonymized and compiled. The Handling Editor structures a notification for the authors. If corrections are requested, authors are granted an appropriate period to submit a point-by-point response alongside revised files. Revised works may then be re-evaluated by editors or sent back for a second round of external peer review.

⏱ Total Peer Review Cycle Tracking: Completed within a strict 06–08 weeks processing window.

Step 8: Final Publication Determination (Editorial Acceptance)

The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated editorial authority. This judgment is reached after checking revision accuracy against journal requirements, scientific validity, methodological quality, and applicable ethical standards. The editorial decision is final subject to the journal's established appeal process.

⏱ Cumulative Workflow Completion: Final Editorial Acceptance is targeted within 08–12 weeks from submission.

Step 9: Production, DOI Assignment, & Open Access Dissemination

Accepted papers undergo professional copyediting, technical formatting checks, typesetting, and author proof review. Where applicable, a unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI) is assigned, and the article is published online through the ANJLMS platform under the journal's applicable open-access licensing terms.

Reviewer Responsibilities & AI Firewalls

Reviewers must maintain absolute confidentiality, provide objective evidence-based assessments within the journal's designated review period, and immediately report any suspected data manipulation, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other research-integrity concerns.

⚠️ Automated Systems & Generative AI Lock: Reviewers are strictly prohibited from copying, uploading, or routing confidential submitted manuscript materials to generative AI tools or unauthorized automated third-party systems. This requirement protects intellectual property, manuscript confidentiality, and author privacy throughout the peer-review process.

Editorial Governance & Appeals Firewalls

Editors operate under strict transparency and conflict-of-interest principles, ensuring that editorial decisions are based on academic and scientific grounds.

Editorial Board Conflict-of-Interest Firewall: Submissions involving active Chief Editors, Editorial Board members, reviewers, or other conflicted individuals are isolated and assigned to an independent editor who is not involved with the authors. Conflicted parties are fully barred from participating in reviewer selection, editorial decisions, or manuscript tracking.

Authors may challenge an adverse decision by providing a detailed, evidence-based written appeal to the Editorial Office in accordance with the journal's established appeal procedures. Appeals should be evaluated independently by an uninvolved editorial official, with the final determination made according to the journal's governance framework.