Reviewing Process

Step 1 (Author): The submitting/ corresponding author should submit the manuscript for the Meras journal online submission system. The submitting/ corresponding author is responsible for the manuscript during the submission and peer-review process; and must ensure that all eligible co-authors, who qualify for the authorship criteria, have been included in the author list and have read and approved the submitted version of the manuscript.

 

Step 2 (Editorial Board): Manuscripts conforming to submission guidelines will be sent to the Editorial Board for initial examination. Manuscripts that do not adhere will be returned to the authors.

 

Step 3 (Reviewers): Manuscripts approved by the Editorial Board will be sent to two reviewers. The Journal uses double-blind peer review for all articles it publishes.

 

Step 4 (Conflicted Evaluation): If one reviewer recommends acceptance while the other recommends rejection, the manuscript will be sent to the Editorial Board to assess the reviewers’ recommendations. More weight may be granted to one recommendation over the other. The Editorial Board may choose to send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

 

Step 5 (Editor-in-Chief): Based on the recommendations of the Editorial Board and the reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief shall make one of the following decisions: acceptance with no corrections, acceptance with minor or major corrections, resubmission or rejection. Resubmission means that the manuscript will be resubmitted as a new manuscript and sent to new reviewers. If the manuscript is accepted with no corrections, it will be immediately published online and granted a DOI.

 

Step 6 (Author): If reviewers ask for corrections, authors will be notified. Once authors address such requests for correction, they will be sent to reviewers for additional review.