Directrices para autores/as

You are welcome to Kashmir Economic Review. We accept a variety of contributions as mentioned in Scope & Coverage. You can read, download, print or use as you like without prior permission of KER or its authors. However, this can be done by clear citation of the author, title and journal in your work.  You can go to Home page or click here to Register with KER. It’s free. To know more about KER, you may click KER Policies.

1. Article Draft to Publication Process

If you encounter technical issues during the submission process, please email managing.editor@ker.org.pk

• The submitting author enters all article information, including all co-authors and corresponding affiliations, and copy-pastes the article text while adding any relevant media. The author is then required to disclose any relevant conflicts of interest and adhere to any relevant ethics statements. Lastly, the author enters contact information for five potential reviewers. (View our comprehensive Author Instructions for a more detailed look at the submission process.)
• Once satisfied with the article draft, the author submits the article for an initial review by the KER editorial team (Editor Check). Channel and competition articles are exempt from Editor Check. Based on this review, the article will be directed down one of the following paths:
• If all KER editorial requirements have been met, the article will be forwarded for a more in-depth review (Editor Preview) before ultimately entering peer review.
• If substantial copy editing is needed, our Preferred Editing servicewill be required to proceed.
• If severe language issues are present, professional third-party language editing services will be required prior to resubmission.
• The article is approved for peer review after the following has been confirmed:
• All KER editorial requirements have been addressed.
• Preferred Editing service has been purchased, if required.
• Professional third-party language editing services have been utilized, if required.
• Invitations are emailed to the preselected peer reviewers when the article is approved for peer review. The editor also invites additional reviewers with relevant domain knowledge at this time. During peer review, the author can invite new reviewers and send reminders to previously invited reviewers via the author dashboard.
• The article is unlocked for editing when two reviews have been submitted. The author may now choose to:
• Wait for additional reviews (all article versions are saved and available to the author and reviewers) before revising and submitting for publication approval (Editor Approval).
• Make revisions and request that the article is re-reviewed by those same reviewers.
• Make revisions and submit for publication approval, while also providing a brief explanation of the revisions.
• Once the article has been submitted for Editor Approval, the editor ensures that all reviewer comments have been acknowledged. If the revised manuscript does not adequately reflect reviewer feedback, the editor is likely to defer publication of the article. The author is then notified that further revision is required.
• The author is notified via email when the article has been approved for publication. The author signs in and publishes the article and also rates the anonymous reviewers. This unique process allows the author to acknowledge the vital contributions made by reviewers, while also providing constructive feedback and helping to build a stronger and more respectful scholarly community.
• The publishing process may vary in length due to article complexity, length and the availability of reviewers with sufficient domain knowledge. In order to accelerate the review process, authors are encouraged to invite multiple reviewers with relevant domain knowledge.

2. Editorial Policies and Process

This section provides an overview of editorial policies along with processes after submissions.

• A full double blind referring process is used for reviewing the original research articles.
• The articles are mailed to professional competent reviewers for review
• The acceptance or rejection of the papers is decided on the basis of the recommendations of the reviewers.
• The papers received after recommended changes, if any, will be reviewed by the same reviewers to ensure the acceptability of the paper.
• Acceptance letter will be issued only after the acceptance of the paper.
• The author will be notified of the month of publication of his/her paper.
• One copy of the journal where the article of the researcher is published will be mailed to him/her.
• Review process could take two to three months.
• The publisher/journal is not responsible for subsequent publication of the research work, elsewhere.
• All manuscripts must be submitted electronically through online system.

Discussion regarding the editorial process is divided into four stages, At Submission, After Submission, After Acceptance/Rejection, and Appeals.

2.1. At Submission

Criteria for publication: The manuscript must be submitted through the online submission system. The article submitted in the category of 'Original Research' presents the scientific research of high quality. The experiments performed, analysis and statistical analyses should comply with the high technical standards and must be explained clearly with sufficient details. The manuscript must reach a specific conclusion for readership interest and must be of scientific importance. KER encourages the use of simple language and small phrases. We expect that regardless of category, the content submitted to KER have not been published elsewhere. If the results have been presented as an abstract in a conference, it should be declared at the time of submission.

Who decides which papers to publish? The Editorial Staff handle the in-house quality check of each manuscript submitted to the journal. The articles which get through the in-house selection are then forward to relevant experts for a blind peer-review. The manuscripts to be published in each issue are selected by the editors, not referees. Although the decision is taken in view of the response from the reviewers. For e.g. the manuscript that is rejected by one of the referee’s may get published in the journal on the basis of editorial board decision and with other referee’s opinion. The reason for this is, referee consulted for each manuscript is well-informed with a single field while the editors can look into it from a broader perspective. So, the final decision remains in the hands of the editorial board.  

How to submit a manuscript in KER? Authors are recommended to follow the instructions mentioned in the formatting guide for initial manuscript submission and revision stages. The preferred format for submission is Microsoft Word. Manuscripts should be submitted through our online submission system. We recommend authors to submit the manuscript with the cover letter. The information provided in the cover letter remains confidential as it is not shared with referees. So it provides an excellent opportunity to the authors to mention the details regarding conflicts of interests or declare any work details that are already under the press or submitted elsewhere. And to express the significance of their submitted work.  

2.2. After Submission

What happens to a submitted Article or Letter? On submission, the manuscript is assigned to an editor covering the subject area, who seeks informal assistance from scientific advisors and editorial colleagues and check the manuscript initially according to KER Guidelines. Special attention is paid by the editors to the readability of the manuscript submitted. In case of in-approval from the editorial board, it is returned back to the author for revision before the initiation of the review process.  The choice of referees is made by the editor who has been assigned to the manuscript. Most papers are sent to two or three referees, but some are sent to more or, occasionally, just to one. Referees are chosen to evaluate the technical and scientific aspects of the paper fully and fairly. On the basis of the review report, the acceptance/rejection letter is issued for the respective manuscript.

Referees' reports: Once accepted to review, it becomes the prime responsibility of the Referee’s to submit the Referee Report within the issued dates. The Referee Reports identify the technical and scientific issues/errors in the manuscript to be addressed before publication.

Conflicts of Interest: The referees may have conflicts of interest that might influence their opinion regarding the manuscript to be reviewed. Although the manuscript undergoes the blind peer-review process, the reviewer may be involved in some other competing work that may result in biased opinions regarding the specific manuscript. We recommend the Referees to disclose all conflicts either professional or commercial. All Referees are requested to check Guidelines for Reviewers before accepting to review a manuscript.

Speed: The manuscripts submitted to KER are regulated electronically via the online system. The editors try making decisions regarding the submitted work as quickly as possible. Authors receive the response within a week that rather the respective manuscript is being sent for the review process or require revised submission. The decision for acceptance/rejection for a submitted manuscript is rapidly taken by the editors once the referee report is received. 

2.3. After Acceptance / Rejection

• Manuscripts submitted to KER undergo at least one review round.  
• The referee's decision is first communicated in-house between the editorial team and the decision regarding acceptance or rejection of the submitted manuscript is then conveyed through an email to the author.
• For completion of the publication process, the authors are asked to deposit the publication fee for the accepted manuscript.
• Authors may be asked for major or minor revision according to the referees’ report for the accepted manuscript. The final decision on publication is deferred, pending the authors’ response to the referees’ comments. Authors are recommended to follow the instructions in manuscript preparation & formatting guidefor each revised submission.
• Once the revised manuscript is resubmitted and changes are approved by the editors, the manuscript proceeds for publication. The manuscript is subedited (copyedited) to ensure maximum clarity and reach, a process that enhances the value of papers in various ways. The sub-editors recheck the manuscript keenly, for language clarity, and whether the figures and tables are clear and fit in the correct space.
• Authors subsequently receive a copy proof (PDF) of the layout by the sub-editors before publication. It is recommended that corresponding authors circulate the copy proofs between co-authors. The corresponding author on behalf of all co-authors is accountable for the content submitted. The accuracy of the content, sequence of authorship list and their current affiliation must be recheck by the Corresponding Author before final submission.
• The editors hold no responsibility for the changes that are not reported at the time copyediting. 
• After the Author's approval, proofs are cycled between the production staff of KERand upon receiving the final approval, the article is published in the upcoming issue of KER. If the authors want their article to appear in a specific month or date, they should provide the date with valid reason.
• The paper may be rejected with no offer to consider a resubmission by the Author. The authors are strongly advised not to resubmit a revision and are allowed to proceed with their manuscript elsewhere.
• Only if the authors feel that they have a strong scientific case for reconsideration (if the referees have missed the point of the paper) they can make an appeal in writing. These appeals must be relevant to the manuscript content. However, manuscripts cannot be submitted elsewhere while an appeal is being considered. The unclear and in general appeals that may contain arguments only and nothing relevant to the content remain unsuccessful.

2.4. Appeals

Although KER does not place appeals to high priority, we do respect your opinion and a valuable appeal may lead to reconsideration. The authors while making an appeal often request to change referees for the respective manuscript. The editors are reluctant to use new reviewers for the same manuscript. According to the policy, referees are selected keeping in view, their expertise in the field. Assigning new referees may further complicate the process rather than simplifying it. This process may take longer but the authors must keep this in mind that the manuscript undergoing an appeal cannot be submitted elsewhere during this time.  

Complaints must be registered via email at editor@ker.org.pk describing your concerns, which will be further investigated as per the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines.

3. Manuscript Preparation

Original Articles must be submitted via our online submission system. The authors are recommended to follow below-mentioned guidelines for manuscript preparation. Visit editorial policies before manuscript submission to KER.

3.1. Cover letter: The information provided in the cover letter remains confidential as it is not shared with referees. So it provides an excellent opportunity to the authors to mention the details regarding conflicts of interests or declare any work details that are already under the press or submitted elsewhere. It must include: 

Conflict of Interest: A conflict of interest arises when a professional judgment concerning a primary interest may be influenced by a secondary interest. KER ask all authors at the time of submission to disclose any conflict of interest they may have within the cover letter.

Acknowledgment: All contributors must be acknowledged and related details must be given in the cover letter and should not be disclosed anywhere in the manuscript.

Funding Statement: Authors should declare sources of funding for the research mentioned. Affirming that they have not entered into an agreement with the funding organization that may have limited their ability to complete research as planned and that they have had full control of all primary data.

3.2. Figures

At initial submission, the figures are preferred to be incorporated within the manuscript in a single word file. The figures and tables may not be of high resolution but it should indicate proper results and data and in an understandable form for the referees and readers.

After acceptance, the authors may be instructed to resend further detailed information and extensive files for better display of results. However, some guidelines for final figure preparation are included below and here if you wish to minimize later revisions and possible delays.

Authors must assure the visibility of each figure and the use of distinct colors. For placement and format of the figures see section of “Guidelines for Headings, Styles, Tables and Figures”.

3.3. Statistical Information

Authors must give detailed information regarding the statistical analysis, the software used, the statistical test applied to generate results must all be mentioned. The error bars must be mentioned for each figure. The relevant significant and non- significant P values must be added. Provide F- values for ANOVAs and T-values for t-tests and degrees of freedom must be given in both cases. Further, formatting of the tables see section of “Guidelines for Headings, Styles, Tables and Figures”.

3.4. Supplementary Information

The data files and calculation and the background details must be retained as supplementary information and should be provided upon request by the editors. Authors must mention data availability statement within the methodology section. 

3.5. Human Subject Data

Details related to subject information and informed consent are mandatory to be submitted along with the manuscript as supplementary files. In case of children, the written informed consent should be obtained from parents or guardians. In situations when it was not feasible or possible to obtain written informed consent, the reasons should be mentioned in detail. In case of illiterate participants, thumb impression is considered as equal to written informed consent. In studies involving occupational participants, permission of employer is mandatory. If animals have been used, it should be mentioned whether the relevant official guidelines for the use of laboratory animals has been followed.

3.6. Related Manuscripts

It is prime duty of the authors to inform the editors regarding any related manuscript that may be under consideration elsewhere or in the press. In such a case referenced documents may be requested.

3.7. Preprint Servers

Our policy on preprints servers of research articles is summarized below:

• The original submitted version of the manuscript (the version that has not undergone peer review) may be posted at any time. Authors are recommended to disclose preprint posting details at the time of manuscript submission.
• KER fully supports and encourages the archiving of preprints in any recognized, not-for-profit, preprint server.
• KER places no restrictions on the license chosen when posting a preprint versionof work.
• KER does not recommend that Accepted Manuscripts are placed on preprint servers. KER produces the Version of Record very quickly after manuscripts are accepted.

4. Manuscript Content and Sections

The structure of the research article preferred by KER includes:

• Title
• Structured Abstract (including background, methodology, results, and conclusion)
• Keywords
• Introduction
• Methodology
• Results
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• Conflicts of interests
• Acknowledgment
• Funding Source
• Reference section.

Your manuscript should contain above mentioned contents according to below-mentioned guidelines:

Title of the article: The title should not exceed 200-250 characters. It should be reasonably self-explanatory yet concise to give an eye-catching view of the topic to the researchers outside the respective field.

Sequence: Complete name of authors with their affiliation, corresponding author name with an asterisk* email addresses of all authors, and keywords (3-5 only), JEL Codes must be mentioned below the title of the article.

Abstract: All manuscripts should accompany clearly written and structured abstract to highlight the most important points of the text. The abstract should not exceed 250 words. The abstract should be structured as background, methodology, results & conclusion.

Introduction: This should describe the purpose of the article. It should end up with the rationale on the basis of which the study has been conducted. (It should neither review the subject extensively nor should it have data or conclusions of the study).

Methodology: All the details related to the data collection, study design, analysis, etc. should be mentioned. The methods should include all the details about the methodology which might be useful to replicate the experiment. Studies involving human subjects should mention the description of the recruitment procedure, compliance, language of the instrument (in case of a questionnaire). Statistical analyses and the software used should also be mentioned in this section.

Results: Results must be presented in the form of text. Tables and illustrations should be added wherever required. The contents of the tables should not be repeated in the text. Instead, a reference to the table or figure number must be given. Tables and illustrations should be merged within the text of the papers. Legends for illustrations should be placed and tables repeating information should be omitted. Each table should have a title and should be numbered sequentially. Any abbreviations should be explained in the footnotes. All graphs should be made in MS Excel, sent as a separate file, even if they are merged in the manuscript. For scanned photographs, the highest resolution should be used.

Discussion: It should emphasize the present findings and comparison should be made of variations or similarities with other studies in the respective field. The detailed data should not be repeated in this section.

 Conclusion: It must be mentioned whether the hypothesis in the article is true, false or no conclusions can be derived.

References: KER follows APA style of referencing. 

5. Guidelines for Headings, Styles, Tables and Figures

5.1. Heading Styles

• Following should be the format for headings and sub-headings:

1. First Level (Bold, First Letter of Each Word Capital)
   • Second level (Bold, Only first letter of the first word capital)

Third level                  (Unbold, Italic, Only first letter of the first word capital)

Example

1. Review of Literature
   • Theoretical literature
     • Theory – 1

5.2. Presenting Tables in the Text

• Table numbers should be in full numbers, e.g. Table 1, Table 2, Table 3
• Table number along with punctuation mark (colon) to be written in “Bold” with font size = 10
• Tables’ headings to be written in regular font (unbold, no italics) in “Capitalize Each Word” case, i.e. First Letter of Each Word to be Capitalized.
• Both table number and its heading to be written at the top of the table, centered aligned.
• Each table should be accompanied by a short description about the variables at the end. (Font size = 9)
  Example

 Table 1: Regression Results for First Hypothesis

Values in parenthesis are t-values.

5.3.    Presenting Figures in the Text

• Figures should be in editable format, i.e. not snapshots
• Figure numbers should be in full numbers, e.g. Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3
• Figure number along with punctuation mark (colon) to be written in “Bold” with font size = 10
• Figures’ headings to be written in regular font (unbold, no italics) in “Capitalize Each Word” case, i.e. First Letter of Each Word to be Capitalized.
• Both figure number and its heading to be written at the bottom of the figure, centered aligned.

Example

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework for Hypothesis – 1

6. APA Referencing Instructions for Authors

6.1. Instructions for In-text Citations

• Please make sure that all the in-text citations are cited in bibliography and vice versa. You can cross check them using “Ctrl + F” function
• Please use “et al.” for more than two authors. Following things should be kept in mind for more than authors
  • It should NOT be used unless there are 3 to 5 authors of a paper.
  • Even if it satisfies the above condition, the first-time citation should be written in full form with all the authors mentioned, e.g. “A, B, C, D, and F (Year)”. From first time onwards, it should be cited throughout as “A et al. (Year)”.
  • If a paper has more than five authors, there is no need to mention all authors for the first time, rather cite with “et al.” throughout.
• When a reference is cited within parentheses, use ampersand “&” instead of the word “and”. For example, (A & B, 2019)
• If a reference is cited without parentheses, use the word “and” instead of ampersand “&”. For example, A and B (2019) argued…..

6.2. Instructions for Citing Bibliography

• There should be a “full stop” and “comma” before the ampersand (&) when citing the second author’s name. There should only be a “full stop” at the end of the last author’s name before year in parentheses. e.g. Jamil, M., & Jalil, A. (2014).
• Last name should be written first followed by only the initials of the first name. e.g. Jamil, M.
• There should be “space” followed by a “full stop” when citing the last names of authors, e.g. Ahmed, E. (2020).
• Title of the work should be in Sentence Case, i.e. only the first letter of the first word should be capitalized and proper nouns like countries’ names etc. Also, if there is a colon in the title, the first letter after it should be capitalized too. Moreover, if there is a colon in the title of work or journal name, the first letter after it should be capitalized too.
• Title of the journal (journal name) should be in Italics. Also, it should be written in “Capitalize Each Word” case, i.e. the first letter of each word should be in capital letters (unless the journal name is written otherwise by the journal itself) except for prepositional words like “of”, “on”, “in” etc.
• Issue and volume number should both be mentioned.
• Volume number should be italicized. Not the issue number in parentheses. There should be NO space between the volume number and issue number in parentheses.
• Page numbers should be mentioned along with range.
• Cite all sources (book, conference, thesis/dissertation, report, book chapter, newspaper) according to the APA guidelines attached as well as above instructions.

Example

Khan, G., & Ahmed, A. M. (2020). Understanding business cycle fluctuations in Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, 59(1), 1-28.

7.   Peer Review Process

• All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff of KER. Only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review. 
• KER is double blind peer review Research Journal.  Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically our paper review process is divided into two parts Internal review process which normally takes about a month and the external review process takes about three months. For peer review we select two reviewers from developed world. The editor then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice whether to:
  • Accept
  • Accept with minor changes(Revise the manuscript to address specific concerns before publication)
  • Accept with major changes (Revise the manuscript to address specific concerns and resubmit for evaluation)
  • Reject, Not suitable for publication

8. Article Withdrawal / Retraction / Removal / Replacement

Editorial board of KER recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians and attaches the highest importance to maintaining trust in the authority of its electronic archive.

It is a general principle of scholarly communication that the editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal shall be published. In making this decision the editor is guided by policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.  An outcome of this principle is the importance of the scholarly archive as a permanent, historic record of the transactions of scholarship. Articles that have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as far as is possible. However, very occasionally circumstances may arise where an article is published that must later be retracted or even removed. Such actions must not be undertaken lightly and can only occur under exceptional circumstances. 

This policy has been designed to address these concerns and to take into account current best practice in the scholarly and library communities.  As standards evolve and change, we will revisit this issue and welcome the input of scholarly and library communities. We believe these issues require international standards and we will be active in lobbying various information bodies to establish international standards and best practices that the publishing and information industries can adopt.

8.1.Article Withdrawal

Only used for Articles in Press which represent early versions of articles and sometimes contain errors, or may have been accidentally submitted twice. Occasionally, but less frequently, the articles may represent infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Articles in Press (articles that have been accepted for publication but which have not been formally published and will not yet have the complete volume/issue/page information) that include errors, or are discovered to be accidental duplicates of other published article(s), or are determined to violate our journal publishing ethics guidelines in the view of the editors (such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like), may be “Withdrawn” from ScienceDirect. Withdrawn means that the article content (HTML and PDF) is removed and replaced with a HTML page and PDF simply stating that the article has been withdrawn according to the Elsevier Policy on Article in Press Withdrawal with a link to the current policy document.

8.2.Article Retraction

Infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Occasionally a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication. The retraction of an article by its authors or the editor under the advice of members of the scholarly community has long been an occasional feature of the learned world. Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this best practice is adopted for article retraction by Elsevier:

• A retraction note titled “Retraction: [article title]” signed by the authors and/or the editor is published in the paginated part of a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list.
• In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article.
• The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note. It is to this screen that the link resolves; the reader can then proceed to the article itself.
• The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the .pdf indicating on each page that it is “retracted.”
• The HTML version of the document is removed.

8.3.Article Removal: Legal Limitations

In an extremely limited number of cases, it may be necessary to remove an article from the online database. This will only occur where the article is clearly defamatory, or infringes others’ legal rights, or where the article is, or we have good reason to expect it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk. In these circumstances, while the metadata (Title and Authors) will be retained, the text will be replaced with a screen indicating the article has been removed for legal reasons.

8.4. Article Replacement

In cases where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk, the authors of the original article may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. In these circumstances the procedures for retraction will be followed with the difference that the database retraction notice will publish a link to the corrected re-published article and a history of the document.

9. Final Submission

The following guide provides instructions only for the manuscripts that had been accepted for publication in KER and the editor has asked the authors for final submission.

General information: To speed up the manuscript processing after acceptance and to minimize potential errors the authors are recommended to follow the below-mentioned guidelines for final submission.

Final text submissions: After acceptance, the following text must be added or rechecked before uploading, complete tables and graphs with appropriate table and graph numbers, titles, legends, and all necessary supplementary information must be added to the text.  

Important: Before the final uploading, the corresponding author is responsible to recheck that the file to be uploaded is correct and is the revised version of the one accepted and is according to the final submission Guide.

Manuscript Formatting: Authors are recommended to follow the instructions mentioned in the “Guidelines for Headings, Styles, Tables and Figures” for manuscript preparation. The preferred format for submission is Microsoft Word.

Reference citations: The reference list should be included in the manuscript file. KER follows APA style of referencing.

Note: After acceptance for publication, KER holds all the rights to sub-edit the manuscript (main text, full Methods, legends for figures and tables and titles) just to maintain the quality and house style the manuscript according to the journal format. After subediting the final copy is sent to the authors for approval. This resolves all queries within the proof stage. This final subedited copy is a copy proof (PDF) of the final layout including all textual material as well as the figures and tables, is sent to the corresponding author for checking before the paper is signed off for printing/online publication.

The corresponding authors are recommended to send the copy proof to all co-authors and coordinate with them and convey all the instruction on behalf of all authors to the journal editor. After the author’s approval, proofs are cycled between the production staff of KER and then scheduled for publication. If the authors want their article to appear in a specific issue, they should provide the date with valid reason.