Editing and Peer-Review Policy

Matenadaran: Medieval and Early Modern Armenian Studies uses a double-blind review process, so you will be asked to provide a title page with complete author details listed, along with a blinded version of your manuscript. When submitting your article, you may suggest one reviewer with bias and 2-3 potential peer reviewers. The editors will not necessarily invite your suggested reviewers but these recommendations can help speed up the peer review process.

The blinded manuscript should not contain any author details. Further to this, any response to reviewers made when submitting a revised manuscript should not disclose the author's identity. Please find more information visit the peer review page.

 

Peer-review process

  • The Editor-in-Chief selects reviewers (usually 2-3 of your peer-reviewers) and sends the paper.
  • The reviewers read the paper and provide comments, suggestions and a recommendation (reject, revise or accept).
  • The editor checks the reviews and sends them to the author, with any extra guidance. If there are revisions, the author decides whether to make these and re-submit.
  • Authors make amendments and re-submit the paper.
  • A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with the recommendations made by the referees, including (if applicable) the latter’s verbatim comments.

 

The Chief Editor's decision is final

The Editor-in-Chief decides which manuscripts are to be published by taking into consideration the validity, novelty and originality of the paper, its importance to readers and researchers, and the peer-review reports. The Editor-in-Chief may consult other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Peer-reviewer reports:

  • The paper is original as to thought and method (including data).
  • The paper is methodologically sound.
  • The paper has results which are presented and support the conclusions.
  • The paper correctly and exhaustively references previous relevant work.
  • The paper follows appropriate ethical guidelines, especially as concerns plagiarism.

The paper adds to the knowledge and development of the field.