Review Guidelines

Author Information Review Guidelines Review Policy Authorship Guidelines Published Statements



The purpose of the review is to provide the chief and regional editors with professional opinion regarding the quality of the manuscript under consideration. The review should give editors information to determine the manuscripts suitability for publication in the AJC. The review will be single blind. The author will not know the identity of the reviewer(s). who the reviewer is but the reviewer will be aware of the author’s identity. Confidential comments can be made to the editors although the review, if acceptable for publication, is intended to provide strength to the paper.

What are the main intentions/ findings of the manuscript? Do they provide innovation in the particular field of enquiry?

  • Are the intentions/findings properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
  • Do the results support the intention/findings? If not, what other evidence is required?
  • Has the research methodology or experiments detailed sufficient to allow independent verification of the results.
  • Is raw data presented within the manuscript, if not, is there reasonable explanation?
  • Is there any additional information that would strengthen or improve the paper?
  • Would the paper be of interest to other experts in the particular field?
  • If the paper is unsuitable for publication, what needs to be changed or added to make it suitable? Doe the research show enough potential?

Reviews can be listed in word format, or annotated in PDF files.


The review process is single blind. Reviewers are obliged not to discuss content and or identities of the manuscripts author. Reviewers are reminded that the process is strictly confidential.

Time Frame

The AJC understands the time pressure on both the reviewers and submitting authors. The AJC has developed and implemented efficient editorial workflow processes to ensure minimal time from article submission to publication. As such we request that reviewers submit their review to the journal with 21days of receipt of the manuscript. Should reviewers have issues with this time frame the AJC would request that they contact the chief editor. 

Conflict of Interest

In line with a fair, open and transparent peer review process, the AJC requests that any conflict of interest that the reviewers have should be declared to the Chief Editor.  Whilst conflict of interest issues are actively managed when choosing a reviewer, factors beyond the editor may be unknown. Conflict of interest issues include: fiduciary or financial interests associated with the article, author or institution; a commercial competitor, a personal relationship with the author.


The AJC recognizes the commitment needed for review. The AJC would like thank all present and future reviewers. Reviewers will be listed in the acknowledgement section of the journal at the last issue for a calendar year. They will also be listed in a special section of the AJC website. The AJC will be pleased to offer references or certification of duties undertaken by individual reviewers.