Editorial Process
The Agriculture Association of Textile Chemical and Critical Reviews Journal (AATCC Review) follows a rigorous and transparent editorial process to ensure that all published articles meet the highest standards of academic excellence, originality, and research integrity. Each manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes a structured and multi-stage review process designed to maintain the quality and credibility of scholarly publishing.
1. Submission and Initial Technical Check
Once a manuscript is submitted through the journal’s online submission system, it first undergoes an initial technical evaluation by the Managing Editor. At this stage, the editorial office checks for compliance with the journal’s formatting and submission guidelines, plagiarism policy, and adherence to the aims and scope of AATCC Review.
Manuscripts that do not meet the required technical standards are returned to the authors for technical corrections before proceeding further. If the submission falls outside the scope of the journal or fails to meet ethical or academic standards, it may be rejected at this stage.
After the initial verification, the manuscript is reviewed by the Academic Editor, who conducts a preliminary assessment of the paper’s scientific merit, novelty, clarity, and relevance. Only manuscripts that demonstrate sound methodology and academic significance proceed to the peer review stage.
2. Peer Review Process
All manuscripts that pass the initial checks are subjected to a double-blind peer review process, ensuring confidentiality and impartiality. The identities of both authors and reviewers remain undisclosed throughout the review process.
Expert reviewers, selected based on their specialization and publication record, evaluate the manuscript according to the following criteria:
- Originality and contribution to scientific advancement
- Appropriateness of research design and methodology
- Accuracy and clarity of data presentation and interpretation
- Relevance to agricultural, textile, and chemical research themes
- Compliance with ethical research and citation standards
Reviewers submit comprehensive review reports along with specific recommendations for editorial consideration. These reports form the basis for the next stage of decision-making.
3. Editorial Decision (Post-Review)
Based on the reviewers’ evaluations, the Academic Editor makes one of the following editorial decisions:
Accept Without Changes: The paper meets all editorial and scientific standards and is accepted as submitted.
Minor Revisions Required: The manuscript requires only small corrections such as grammatical improvement, better figure labeling, or minor data clarification.
Major Revisions Required: Substantial improvements are necessary in terms of analysis, structure, or methodology. The authors are invited to revise and resubmit the paper with a detailed response to reviewers’ comments.
Reject and Resubmit: The manuscript requires extensive conceptual or experimental modification. Authors may submit a completely revised version as a new submission after substantial improvement.
Reject: The manuscript is declined because it does not meet the journal’s quality criteria, lacks originality, or falls outside the scope of AATCC Review.
Authors receive the editor’s decision along with the complete reviewer feedback for revision or record.
4. Author’s Revision
If revisions are requested, authors must submit the revised version of their manuscript along with:
- A point-by-point response letter addressing each reviewer comment, and
- A highlighted version of the revised manuscript showing all modifications.
Depending on the extent of the revisions, the Academic Editor may decide to conduct a second-round peer review to ensure that all reviewer and editorial concerns have been satisfactorily resolved.
5. Final Editorial Decision
After evaluating the revised manuscript and considering any additional reviewer input, the Academic Editor makes the final decision. The possible outcomes at this stage are:
Acceptance for Publication – the paper meets all editorial and scientific requirements.
Further Minor Corrections – the paper is conditionally accepted pending small editorial changes.
Rejection After Revision – if the manuscript fails to address essential comments or does not achieve the required quality level.
Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to production for publication.
6. Production and Publication
In the production stage, the accepted manuscript undergoes copy editing, typesetting, proofreading, and final formatting. Authors are provided with page proofs for final review before publication.
Each article is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and published online in the appropriate issue of AATCC Review. The published articles are then made available globally and submitted for indexing in relevant abstracting and citation databases.
7. Ethical and Quality Assurance Policy
The AATCC Review Journal is firmly committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in academic publishing. All submissions are evaluated solely on their scholarly merit, free from discrimination, bias, or conflict of interest.
The journal follows the principles and best practices outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Plagiarism, duplicate submission, data manipulation, or unethical research practices are strictly prohibited. Any violations are handled in accordance with COPE guidelines to preserve the integrity of the publication process.
8. Commitment to Transparency and Excellence
The AATCC Review values transparency and collaboration between authors, editors, and reviewers. The journal strives to foster scientific dialogue by providing constructive feedback, timely communication, and an efficient editorial workflow.
Through its rigorous editorial process, AATCC Review continues to uphold its mission of promoting innovative, interdisciplinary, and impact research across the fields of agriculture, textile, chemical, and critical reviews.