Editorial Workflow

Role of the Editor

The Editor, as a member of the editorial board of the publication, is responsible for ensuring that the publication maintains the highest quality while adhering to the publication policies and procedures

If the author sends a submission directly to the editor, they should be instructed to submit their paper to United Life Publications (ULP) through the online Electronic Submission System. The Managing Editor checks the submission for compliance to our guidelines (i.e. page length) and then notifies the Editor-In-Chief (EIC) that the manuscript is ready for an editor assignment.  It may or may not be the editor who originally received the paper. This not only ensures that our submissions are tracked properly, but it also ensures that each paper receives a fair and unbiased review. Any paper that does not go through the review process via United Life Publications will not be recognized as a submission and may not be published.

The most important role of the editor is the identification of appropriate reviewers for a manuscript.   Editors should assign two confirmed reviewers or administratively reject the paper within two weeks upon receiving their editor assignment.  Should the editor decide not to assign reviewers but instead administratively reject the paper, an explanation should be sent to the author explaining the reasons for rejection.

Reviewers are principally identified through peer contact, through the reviewer database or from references listed at the end of the manuscript. In rare circumstances, it may be necessary for the author to suggest possible expert reviewers, when a field is extremely narrow or new; this is an exception and the resulting reviewers may not be completely unbiased. This process should be used only in exceptional cases, since using these reviewers may compromise the confidentiality of the review process.

United Life Publications will notify the editor and journal admin as soon as the required number of reviews are received. Manuscripts submitted United Life Publications normally receive two independent peer reviews. Our policy requires that no fewer than two peer reviews be conducted. Sometimes, in a very narrow field, due to workload or other factors, it is extremely difficult to secure a third review. In that event, it is permissible to have two peer reviews plus the review of the editor; however, three reviews should be the norm. 

Making Decisions on Manuscripts

• Accept: An accept decision means that an editor is accepting the paper "as is" and with no further changes whatsoever. The paper will not be seen again by the editor or by the reviewers.
• Major Revision: A major revision means that the paper should go back to the original reviewers for a second round of reviews. We strongly discourage editors from making a decision based on their own review of the manuscript if a major revision had been previously required. This may cause problems in the future if reviewers were to see a published paper that they did not have a chance to re-review. 
• Minor Revision: The minor version may not go back to the reviewers, if the editor feels the revisions are sufficient / appropriate. Any revision in length by more than 20% should be a "Major Revision".
• Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication.
• Resubmit as "New": This may be an alternative decision to asking for a second major revision.