Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief to ensure that they meet the mission of the journal and the editorial board goals. If the manuscript is considered to meet the qualities set, then, the manuscript is sent for review to a member of the relevant editorial board. The handling editor is constituted to use their expertise to decide whether the manuscript will be peer-reviewed. If the manuscript is accepted, then it is sent to two peer reviewers who are experts in their field and aware of the ongoing research.
Peer reviewers send their evaluations and recommendations to the handling editor. The handling editor will contact the author(s) informing them whether the manuscript is accepted or rejected and if any alterations need to be made. In addition, the handling editor sets a deadline for resubmission, with consideration of the changes/recommendations that need to be implemented.
Reviewers evaluate the resubmitted manuscript and decide whether the required changes were made, if sufficient justification has been provided in case a suggestion was not implemented, or if the manuscript will be rejected. In the first case, the reviewers inform the handling editor who then informs the editor-in-chief. The Editor-in-Chief will take the final decision whether to accept or reject the manuscript. The decision is taken with consideration of the importance of the work to different communities, that of researchers and that of practitioners.
Unicaf Online Journal employs a double-blind review model. This means that the names of the peer-reviewers are not disclosed to the author(s) and the names of the authors are not disclosed to the peer-reviewers. Names are made known at the point of publication.