Editorial Review Process
All research submissions shall be subjected to double blind peer review process after a satisfactory blind preliminary review as part of the quality assurance. The author is required to critically evaluate the comments and be convinced of the merits of the comments without compromising the acceptance. As much as possible, the author is expected to rebut and offer counter explanations or justifications. As an academic exercise, different opinions must be acknowledged, but the concepts must be correct since wrong concepts are not acceptable. It is recommended that authors should accommodate the corrections, additions or remarks made by the reviewer as much as possible, since the final manuscript is a personal creation.
Well-intended papers may be rejected on the grounds of false assumptions, inadequate background knowledge of significant works already published and lack of evidence of contribution to knowledge. Unreliable data and facts, unfamiliarity with current trends, generalized statements, limited scope of content and scholarship would also make the paper unacceptable. Authors must therefore show evidence of balance between relevance, focus and scope, while avoiding outdated references and presenting over-flogged topics depicting merely already known facts.
Further details are contained in the attached document on guidelines for publishing in the JBR and teh Assessment Process attached.