The Editorial Board of the Global Journal of Arts gives due attention to all the papers that it receives. All papers submitted to us go through three steps. Each piece is coded and edited by two members of the editorial board before it is sent it to an independent referee. Line editing, source checks, citation and style changes are usually done at the end.

 

This process takes approximately a week to complete as often authors need to be given sufficient time to incorporate suggestions made by the editorial board and the referee. However, in cases of requests for expedited reviews, we take a decision in minimum of 5 business days.

 

Papers not within our theme are rejected at the first stage and authors notified instantly. All exchanges with authors take place through email. Barring a few cases, we usually give reasons for rejecting a paper. As a rule, papers are never rejected for lack of space and we always hold them for publication in our next issue, as we inculcate the policy of rolling submissions for all our Journals. For the interim period, authors are issued a working citation.

 

Being a peer reviewed journal, strive to expedite the process of review to avoid inconvinience and uncertainity to the authors. However, please consider submitting your paper to us exclusively or a few days earlier than you would do to other journals.

 

 

Responsibility of Authors

 

Expected Quality

 

• It is conspicuously advised to authors to avoid copy and paste methodology of writing articles.

• Articles must showcase novelty in thoughts and content.

• Formatting standards should be maintained in piece of publication so that it could be sufficient informative about the research and profile of authors.

• Appropriate Citations, referencing of individual articles, authors and publications are expected while writing articles.

 

Novelty and Plagiarism

 

• Authors are expected to present the entire original piece and should cite or mention in references if content or words of other articles are used.

• Every author will be held responsible for the performance and fulfillment with the policy to avoid malpractices and breach of ethical standards of the publication.

• Authors should assure that the piece of knowledge ready for publication is original copy and have not been published anywhere earlier and is not in consideration for publication anywhere else.

• Authors should accept and correct the mistakes and consider the suggestions given by the panel of reviewers.

 

 

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

 

• Ethically it is suggestible to authors to not publish the same content of knowledge at various platforms for publication

• Simultaneous submissions or concurrent reviews of same paper are mark of unprofessionalism and are strictly not acceptable.

• A paper already published in some national or international journal should not be presented for consideration to again publish at any other Journal. It is considered as breach of novelty.

 

Authority of Paper

 

• Names of authors and co-authors should be significantly mentioned in the research article.

• The contributors, agencies and institutions supporting the study or who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be mentioned in the acknowledgements or listed as contributors.

• Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.

• The corresponding author that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

 

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

 

• If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

• If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them.

• Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects.

• The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

 

 

Duties of Editors

 

Publication Decisions

 

• The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.

• 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 (or society officers) in making this decision.

 

Fair play

• ​An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

 

Confidentiality

• 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.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

 

• 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.

• Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should reuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

• Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.

• If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant even if it is discovered years after publication.

 

With Warm Regards,

Managing Editor