Arbitration procedures and stages

The reviewing and publication procedures in the Arab Journal of Social Responsibility (AJSR) are consistent with all procedures and regulations for scientific publishing globally, as the journal follows a global scientific editorial approach based on the highest professional standards in reviewing.

Being a journal that relies on double reviewing based on the anonymity of both writers and reviewing, the journal requires that articles and research be submitted free of any indications of the author of the article or his institutional affiliation, while the journal guarantees the anonymity of the writer during the review phase.

1- Reviewing in the Arab Journal of Social Responsibility (AJSR) is done through the “Open Journals System” which is an electronic system developed to organize the stages of receiving research, its review stages, and its publication stages. It is a technical service that facilitates researchers and reviewers, speeds up the reviewing process and saves time and effort. For everyone.

2 - The researcher uploads his search through the system, and the researcher can easily and easily enter the system through the link, and then enter his personal and scientific data and upload his search, and he will receive a message by e-mail that the research has been received.

3 - The reviewer is registered among the magazine’s accredited experts, and the reviewer can easily enter the system, and then enter his personal and scientific data and his bank account number, to be among a large list of reviewers, and the reviewer must specify his exact specialization upon registration, this identification helps the editor in chief when choosing the reviewer for reviewing. All information is subject to modification by the reviewer at any time, and the editor-in-chief can view all the reviewer’s data.

4 - The list of reviewers is subject to scrutiny and editing every period so that those who are distinguished: quality, accuracy and speed of completion are selected.

5- After the (initial examination) and the recommendation to accept the research for review, the editor-in-chief, in consultation with the members of the editorial board, selects two reviewers for the same research, and the research is subject to confidential review to determine its validity for publication.

6 - The research is sent to the reviewers via (the system) and the reviewer is notified by e-mail.

7 - The research to be reviewed appears in the reviewer’s account in the system after the editor-in-chief sends it to him, and the research appears in (Word) and (PDF) formats, and the reviewer does not see the name of the researcher, and vice versa, the researcher does not see the name of the reviewer.

8 - There is a form ready for review available in (the system), and the reviewer is allowed to attach an attached file on several pages if he wants to send something to the magazine or if he comments on the research itself and wants to send it to the magazine.

9 - The reviewing period is within six weeks and the reviewer is informed of this, after which the reviewer must reply either (acceptance), which is acceptance of the research for publication, or (acceptance of the amendment condition), which is acceptance of the research for publication on the terms of making some amendments to it, or (rejection), which is the recommendation to apologize for publishing search.

10 - Sending a reminder to the reviewer after (10) days of receiving the research by e-mail.

11 - When the reviewer sends his report, a message arrives to the editor-in-chief that the arbitrator … has sent his report on the research …

12 - Through the system, the researcher can inquire about the research, what was done about it, and is it under preliminary examination? Or under review? or under modification? Or on the way to publication? In what number will it be published?

13 - In the event of a recommendation to “apologise for publishing the research,” the researcher will be notified via the “system” of “rejection of the research” and will feel a message of apology via an email.

14 - In the event of a recommendation to “accept the research with conditions,” the researcher shall be notified by a message through the (the system) to make some amendments according to the reviewers’ reports and the notes received from them, and then return the revised research through the (the system) as well.

15 - In the event of a recommendation to “accept the research for publication,” the researcher shall be notified through the “system” and feel a “mobile” message of this, and write to him a “certificate” accepting the research for publication.

16 - After receiving the corrections, an appreciation letter is sent to the reviewer via the system or an email.

17 - Through the system, the reviewer can review all the research he previously ruled.

18 - There will be a box in the system for the evaluation of the reviewer by the editor-in-chief, including: the quality of the correction, and the response on time.