Information for Reviewers
The editor will assign the submitted paper to an associate editor, and associate editor will recommend reviewers from Editorial Review Board and ad-hoc reviewers. Once the evaluations from two reviewers are ready, the editor makes the final decision. If there is any conflict between two reviewers, the editor could send the paper to the third reviewer. The turnaround in the first-round is about 21 days, and the editor will make a final decision after the second round review.
Reviewer should make one recommendation from the following five criteria. Reviewers make sure that their recommendation matches the content of their reviews.
- Accept: No changes are necessary. Reviewers will be signed off on the manuscript.
- Condition Accept: Subject to minor revision. Reviewers could use this recommendation when a manuscript is strong enough to have only minor corrections. Editor or associate editor will make a decision for the revised manuscript in the next round.
- Minor Revision: Reviewers use this recommendation when manuscripts have potential for the publication, but significant changes should be made to address your concerns. Reviewers will reevaluate the revised manuscript in the next round.
- Major Revision: Reviewers use this recommendation when a manuscript needs significant revision to be published, which might carry substantial risk to authors. The risky revision may signal that there is very low possibility for the manuscript to proceed after the next round.
- Reject: Reviewers use this recommendation for the manuscripts that are weak and have no hope for publication at AMJ. Comments to the authors should include the major concern/weaknesses as well as encouraging advice for how to improve the paper in the future.
- Promptness: Reviews should provide reviews within the allotted time. Typically, we ask reviewers to provide a first-round review within 18 days.
- Rigor: Reviewers should read the entire manuscript and provide reviews including strength as well as weakness of the manuscript in detail. If reviewers feel unqualified to evaluate the paper, indicate this to the editor and associate editor.
- Anonymity: AMJ uses a double-blind review process. Therefore authors and reviewers are not informed of the other’s identities. If reviewers believe that they are not able to provide fair reviews because reviewers are aware of an authors’ identity or have any conflict of interest, contact the editorial office.
- Second-round reviews: Reviewers could ask for significant changes in the first-round. It is not appropriate to raise such changes in the second-rounds.
Reviewers could provide honest comments to the editor and associate editor.
We work hard to provide a fair and timely review process for all our manuscripts and to publish high-quality papers, which is dependent upon the time and efforts of our reviewers. To ensure the quality review service to the authors, the following guidelines are mandated.
Become a reviewer for AMJ
Getting involved in the AMJ review process will be a highly rewarding and meaningful experience that can improve your research and help to build your academic career. AMJ is looking for new reviewers with diverse areas of expertise. Please write email to AMJ office and send a brief bio including your areas of expertise: