Fostering excellence in scholarly publishing
Navigate this page
Towards Academic Excellence
At ATA Press, we uphold a steadfast commitment to maintaining high standards of editorial and academic publishing. Every research article, review paper, and other scholarly communication featured in our journals undergo a rigorous peer review process. Our dedication to scholarly excellence ensures that we only publish articles approved by highly qualified researchers and scholars with expertise in the respective field.
Desk Review and Triage
The entire editorial process at ATA Press is managed through our online journal system. Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes a preliminary desk review conducted by our journal’s editorial office. This review ensures that the manuscript is free from ethical malpractices, that all required files are complete, and that relevant metadata are in proper order. A large number of manuscripts are rejected at this phase due to misalignments in submission and journal scope, and non-compliance to publication ethics and guidelines.
Following the screening phase, manuscripts may then be triaged by a senior Editorial member, which includes the Chief Editor and a select team of Associate/Section Editors of the journal. If a manuscript is deemed unsuitable for the journal during this phase, it may face rejection. The Editorial Board members for each journal are listed on the respective journal’s homepage for transparency and accessibility.
Review and Editorial Assignment
Manuscripts that successfully clear the preliminary phases are assigned to an Academic Editor who oversees the peer review process. This assignment is undertaken through placement by the journal’s handling editor based on the Academic Editor’s subject expertise or is personally overseen by a senior Editorial Board Member.
The Academic Editor initiates an assessment of the manuscript before extending invitations to potential reviewers who possess the requisite expertise. Reviewers are tasked with summarizing the manuscript, offering constructive feedback and analysis, and delivering recommendations on whether the manuscript should be accepted, reconsidered after changes, or rejected.
Making a Decision
Based on the review reports received, the Academic Editor renders one of the following decisions:
- Reject: If the manuscript is not suitable for publication, the authors are provided with any received review reports and informed of the manuscript’s ineligibility for publication.
- Consider after Major Changes: Authors are advised to revise and resubmit their manuscript, addressing significant changes as suggested by reviewers. Subsequently, the manuscript undergoes reassessment by one or more original reviewers before a new recommendation is made.
- Consider after Minor Changes: Authors are requested to make minor adjustments to their manuscript as recommended by reviewers. Upon the Editor’s satisfaction with the final manuscript, it may be recommended for publication without major alterations.
- Publish Unaltered: When the Academic Editor deems that the manuscript is ready for publication without further revisions, it proceeds for a final check by our journal’s editorial office to ensure adherence to our guidelines and policies. Upon successful completion of this step, the authors are notified of the manuscript’s acceptance.
