A Junior editor puts the paper in the publishing template and checks for grammar or plagiarism issues on software. Non-compliance to these leads to instant rejection of the manuscript.

Few concerns at this stage are:

• Does your manuscript fit the scope of the journal?
• Is it in line with the journal’s mission and assessment criteria?
• Does it conform to the set standards for language and format style of the journal?

A Sub Editor checks the relevance of the topic and the contribution of research to the scope of journal.

Few concerns at this stage are:

• How is the novelty of your paper against reader expectation and impact of the journal?
• Does it have the necessary details for readers to fully understand and repeat your analysis and experiments?
• Does it have poorly presented data or a large number of self citations?

The Chief Editor goes through the manuscript thoroughly to check:

• Whether the sample size is too small or lacking controls
• If there are any inappropriate statistical tests or a lack of statistics altogether
• If the methodology used is older or has been surpassed by newer, more powerful methods giving robust results
• Whether your hypothesis is clear or scientifically valid, and answers the questions posed
• Whether the conclusions are based on assumptions or are supported by your data
• After the initial screening, hardly one-fifth of the submissions are finally sent for peer review.

There are three common types of peer review for journal publication:

• Single blind
• Double blind
• Open peer review

A minimum of 2 experts are chosen for the peer review. The peer review is completed once all the reviewers send the journal a detailed report with their comments on the manuscript and their recommendation.