Review Procedure

Authors are encouraged to upload a DOC file with full text that incorporates tables and figures as well as separated files of tables and figures. The reference style, the sections of the paper and other formatting issues are described in detail in instruction for authors (

Review Process

After a paper is submitted to a journal, a journal Editor decides whether or not to send the manuscript for full peer review. Only after clearing the initial screening the manuscript is sent to two peer reviewers. Finally, journal editors or the journal’s editorial board consider the peer reviewers’ reports and make the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication.

Reviewers can recommend to Editor one of the following:
• Accept submission without revisions
• Accept submission after minor revisions 
• Accept submission after major revisions 
• Revise and resubmit 
• Decline submission

Technical reasons for rejection include:
• Incomplete data such as too small a sample size or missing or poor controls
• Poor analysis such as using inappropriate statistical tests or a lack of statistics altogether
• Inappropriate methodology for answering hypothesis or using old methodology that has been surpassed by newer, more powerful methods that provide more robust results
• Weak research motive where hypothesis is not clear or scientifically valid
• Inaccurate conclusions on assumptions that are not supported by data

Editorial reasons for rejection include:
• Out of scope for the journal
• Not enough of an advance or of enough impact for the journal
• Research ethics ignored such as consent from patients or approval from an ethics committee for animal research
• Lack of proper structure or not following journal formatting requirements
• Lack of the necessary detail for readers to fully understand and repeat the authors’ analysis and experiments
• Lack of up-to-date references or references containing a high proportion of self-citations
• Has poor language quality such that it cannot be understood by readers
• Difficult to follow logic or poorly presented data.
• Violation of publication ethics

The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers 

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author who may also assist the author in improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research report in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. 

Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement or an observation, derivation, or argument that had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. 

A reviewer should also call the editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


Submission Process

All submissions to G&A must be made electronically via the Open Journal System (OJS) online submission and peer review system at the following URL:

First-time users must register and provide basic information. After creating profile, authors will be guided thought the on-line submission process.