Global Proceedings Repository - American Research Foundation

Peer Review Process

Conference accept both Abstracts and Full Papers!

Researchers submitting their Abstracts / Full Papers have a great opportunity to discuss their research project with other researchers attending the conference and shall have their full research articles published in the Conference Repository available online.

Archive Access Policy

The presentations and papers that make up the current and archived conferences on this site have been made open access and are freely available for viewing, for the benefit of authors and interested readers.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Global Proceedings Repository is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. Global Proceedings Repository's Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is based, on the following policies and best practices.

• All submitted papers are subject to double-blind review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the paper.

• The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, significance, originality, readability and language.

• The possible decisions include acceptance or rejection.

• Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.

• Articles may be rejected without review if they are obviously not suitable for publication.

• The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

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

• The staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

• Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

• Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents and are reviewed by anonymous staff.

• A reviewer should also call to the publisher's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

• A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

• The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

• Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publication concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

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

• All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.