What is Open Peer Review?

Peer review is a way by which manuscripts can be assessed for their quality. Reviewers scrutinize the draft of a journal article, grant application, or other work and provide feedback to the author(s) for improving the text. Reviewers don’t just read the text, but also evaluate whether the research presented is sound, whether the methods used in the research are in keeping with basic scientific protocols, and whether the analysis of the results is valid. In addition, reviewers need to determine whether the subject matter (e.g., a research study) is in keeping with the journal’s particular field of study and is a novel scientific concept to warrant publishing it.

Even with the system in place, there are conflicting views about peer review and their merits. Most researchers believe that the current peer review system is lacking. However, they also agree that peer reviews are valuable in helping improve their papers, which help get them published. Still, a 2008 study revealed approximately one-third of those asked thought that the system could be improved.

Reviewer Anonymity

As mentioned, peer reviewers also assess grant applications and this process has its flaws. In an article in Times Higher Education, the author describes the grant review process as one of stifling innovative research and paring down each application into a numerical score. Funding sources presume that the reviewers are unbiased and knowledgeable. The funding agencies often base their decisions on these scores without having ever read the actual research proposal. The suggestion of having reviewers reveal their identities would remove any doubt of reviewer qualifications and hopes to hold the reviewers more accountable for these types of scoring protocols.

In an article published on F1000 Research, an open-research publishing platform, author Tony Ross-Hellauer describes some of the criticisms of the anonymous peer review as follows:

  • Unreliable and inconsistent: Reviewers rarely agree with one another. Decisions to reject or accept a paper are not consistent. Papers have been known to be published but then rejected when resubmitted to the same journal later.
  • Publication delays and costs: At times, the traditional peer review process can delay publication of an article for a year or more. When “time is money” and research opportunities must be taken advantage of, this delay can be a huge cost to the researcher.
  • No accountability: Because of anonymity, reviewers can be biased, have conflicts of interest, or purposely give a bad review (or even a stellar review) because of some personal agenda.
  • Biases: Although they should remain impartial, reviewers have biases based on sex, nationality, language or other characteristics of the author(s). They can also be biased against the study subject or new methods of research.
  • No incentives: In most countries, reviewers volunteer their time. Some feel that this is part of their job as a scholar; however, others might feel unappreciated for their time and talent. This might have an impact on the reviewer’s incentive to perform.
  • Wasted information: Discussions between editors and reviewers or between reviewers and authors are often valuable information for younger researchers. It can help provide them with guidelines for the publishing process. Unfortunately, this information is never passed on.

 

Because of these obvious dissatisfactions with the peer review process, a change to “open peer review” or “OPR” has been suggested. The premise is that an open peer review process would avoid many of the issues listed above.

What Is OPR?

OPR was first considered about 30 years ago but became more popular in the 1990s. Originally defined only as revealing a reviewer’s identity, it has now expanded to include other innovations. Although suggested as a means by which to help streamline the process and ensure honest reviews, the actual definition OPR has eluded those in the research and publishing fields. A plethora of different meanings prompted a study on the accepted definitions of the term.

In an article published on F1000 Research, author Tony Ross-Hellauer delves into the several different definitions of OPR and created a “corpus of 122 definitions” for the study. Ross-Hellauer reminds us that there is yet no standard definition of OPR. On the contrary, many definitions overlap and even contradict each other as follows:

  • Identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed,
  • Reviewer reports are published alongside articles,
  • Both of these conditions,
  • Not just invited experts are able to comment, and/or
  • Combinations of these and other new methods.

 

These definitions are very open ended and those discussing OPR use one, some, or all of these in combination.

The Study on OPR

Ross-Hellauer reviewed the literature (e.g., Web of Science, PubMed, Google Scholar, and BioMed) for articles that mentioned “open review” or OPR and found 122 definitions of the term! The author then reviewed and classified all 122 definitions according to a set of traits that were new to the traditional peer review process. He concluded by defining seven traits of OPR and offered these as a basis for the definition of OPR as follows:

  • Open identities: Authors’ and reviewers’ identities revealed.
  • Open reports: Reviews published with the article.
  • Open participation: Readers able to contribute to review process.
  • Open interaction: Reciprocal discussions between parties.
  • Open pre-review manuscripts: Manuscripts immediately available before formal peer review.
  • Open final-version commenting: Review or commenting on final “version of record” publications.
  • Open platforms: Review facilitated entity other than the venue of publication.

 

It appears from various studies that OPR is a valuable revision to the old peer review process and its anonymity. Although most agree that peer review has always been valuable, it is not without its faults. There is hope that the OPR system will eliminate much of these criticisms.

Resource: https://www.enago.com/

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

IDENTIFYING IMPACT IN A TRANSNATIONAL PROJECT PROVIDING PARENT EDUCATION FOR FAMILIES LIVING WITH AUTISM IN SOUTH-EAST EUROPE

Paul BRAMBLE1,
David PREECE2

1Research & Innovation Funding Support, University of Northampton, UK
2Centre for Education and Research, University of Northampton, UK
E-mail: david.preece@northampton.ac.uk
Received: 25-January-2020
Revised: 20-February-2020
Accepted: 27-February-2020
Online first: 28-February-2020

Abstract

Introduction: Impact is a key concept in all aspects of research and development activity. The extent to which it is effectively identified can affect research activity at all levels: from whether an individual project is funded, to the funding granted to – and the reputations of – entire institutions. Funding for research and other activity supporting education and social inclusion is limited and highly contested. It is therefore imperative that impact is effectively identified.

Objective: The Erasmus+ National Agencies’ Impact+ tool was developed to help projects identify impact in four domains: systemic impact, impact regarding target groups, impact to partner organisations and impact to project personnel. This paper discusses this tool’s adaptation to identify impact in a three-year transnational project where a partnership of universities, schools, non-governmental organisations and small enterprises developed, provided and evaluated parent education in autism in three south-east European countries.

Method: A semi-structured questionnaire was completed by personnel from partner organisations within the project (n=16). Findings regarding the four domains of impact are presented, and differences of response within the partnership are discussed.

Conclusion: It is suggested that this tool is helpful in supporting a broader conceptualisation of impact, and has wider utility.

Key words: research impact, research evaluation, Erasmus+, Impact+

Citation: Bramble, P., Preeced, D. Identifying impact in a transnational project providing parent education for families living with autism in south-east Europe. Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities, 2020 Jul 05; 3(1):4-13. https://doi.org/10.26407/2020jrtdd.1.26

Full Text Article

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

IDENTIFYING IMPACT IN A TRANSNATIONAL PROJECT PROVIDING PARENT EDUCATION FOR FAMILIES LIVING WITH AUTISM IN SOUTH-EAST EUROPE

Paul BRAMBLE1,
David PREECE2

1Research & Innovation Funding Support, University of Northampton, UK
2Centre for Education and Research, University of Northampton, UK
E-mail: david.preece@northampton.ac.uk
Received: 25-January-2020
Revised: 20-February-2020
Accepted: 27-February-2020
Online first: 28-February-2020

Abstract

Introduction: Impact is a key concept in all aspects of research and development activity. The extent to which it is effectively identified can affect research activity at all levels: from whether an individual project is funded, to the funding granted to – and the reputations of – entire institutions. Funding for research and other activity supporting education and social inclusion is limited and highly contested. It is therefore imperative that impact is effectively identified.

Objective: The Erasmus+ National Agencies’ Impact+ tool was developed to help projects identify impact in four domains: systemic impact, impact regarding target groups, impact to partner organisations and impact to project personnel. This paper discusses this tool’s adaptation to identify impact in a three-year transnational project where a partnership of universities, schools, non-governmental organisations and small enterprises developed, provided and evaluated parent education in autism in three south-east European countries.

Method: A semi-structured questionnaire was completed by personnel from partner organisations within the project (n=16). Findings regarding the four domains of impact are presented, and differences of response within the partnership are discussed.

Conclusion: It is suggested that this tool is helpful in supporting a broader conceptualisation of impact, and has wider utility.

 

Key words: research impact, research evaluation, Erasmus+, Impact+

 

Citation: Bramble, P., Preeced, D. Identifying impact in a transnational project providing parent education for families living with autism in south-east Europe. Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities. https://doi.org/10.26407/2020jrtdd.1.26

Full Text Article Online First 

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

JRTDD newest issue 2, Volumen 2 for 2019 has already been published

22-January-2020
Dear colleagues and readers,
I would like to inform you that 2nd issue of the 2nd volume of Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities is published online (January 22nd, 2020). A total number of 6 papers are published. Next Issue 1, Vol. 3 of JRTDD for the 2020 is expected to be published until June 30th, 2020.

Accessing JRTDD Online
To view a current article which appears online, please visit this link .
You, your colleagues, and students will be able to view articles (Full-Text PDF and Online First Full-text PDF) and have unlimited access to the journal (JRTDD is an open access, international, peer reviewed and non for profit journal).
Citing Articles Using the Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
When citing articles from JRTDD, we encourage you to use article’s DOI in addition to traditional citation information. This is an industry standard, a link-resolving system that allows any link to remain “persistent” even if the location of the article changes at some point in the future. Hence, when you are quoting the link for an article, you should always quote the DOI rather than the URL of our home page.
Useful Online Features for Authors
Your registration in online submission (http://jrtdd.com/submit-your-manuscript/) will enable you with continuous information connected with JRTDD. We encourage you to share publications from JRTDD platform and online registration with your colleagues. You can feel free to share every publication on social media.
We invite you to the content of the JRTDD and we think that you will consider publishing with Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities.

Call for papers for Vol.3, Issue 1 is open until March 31st.

Suggested topics include but are not limited to

  • ReAttach Therapy,
  • Autism Spectrum Disorders,
  • Neuropsychological Research,
  • Medical Aspects of Disability,
  • Special Education Research,
  • Rehabilitation Research,
  • Social Aspects of Disability,
  • Master theses and PhD theses in the field,
  • Book Reviews in the field.

If you have any questions or you face problems with paper submission, please feel free to contact us: journaljrtdd@gmail.com

Cheers,

JRTDD Editor-in-chief

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

JRTDD Vol. 2 Number 1 already has been published

09-September-2019
Dear colleagues and readers,
I would like to inform you that 1st issue of the 2nd volume of Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities is published online (September 8, 2019). A total number of 5 papers are published. Next Issue 2 of JRTDD for the 2019 year is expected to be published until December 31th, 2019.

Accessing JRTDD Online
To view a current article which appears online, please visit https://jrtdd.com/volume-2-number-1/
You, your colleagues, and students will be able to view articles (Full-Text PDF and Online First Full-text PDF) and have unlimited access to the journal (JRTDD is an open access, international, peer reviewed journal).
Citing Articles Using the Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
When citing articles from JRTDD, we encourage you to use article’s DOI in addition to traditional citation information. This is an industry standard, a link-resolving system that allows any link to remain “persistent” even if the location of the article changes at some point in the future. Hence, when you are quoting the link for an article, you should always quote the DOI rather than the URL of our home page.
Useful Online Features for Authors
Your registration in online submission (http://jrtdd.com/submit-your-manuscript/) will enable you with continuous information connected with JRTDD. We encourage you to share publications from JRTDD platform and online registration with your colleagues. You can feel free to share every publication on social media.
We invite you to the content of the JRTDD and we think that you will consider publishing with Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities.

Call for papers for Vol.2, Issue 2 is open until October 31st.

Suggested topics include but are not limited to

  • ReAttach Therapy,
  • Autism Spectrum Disorders,
  • Neuropsychological Research,
  • Medical Aspects of Disability,
  • Special Education Research,
  • Rehabilitation Research,
  • Social Aspects of Disability,
  • Master theses and PhD theses in the field,
  • Book Reviews in the field.

If you have any questions or you face problems with paper submission, please feel free to contact us: journaljrtdd@gmail.com

Cheers,

JRTDD Editor-in-chief

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

Role of Academic Publisher

1. Journal Owners

Owners and editors of medical journals share a common purpose, but they have different responsibilities, and sometimes those differences lead to conflicts.

It is the responsibility of medical journal owners to appoint and dismiss editors.

Owners should provide editors at the time of their appointment with a contract that clearly states their rights and duties, authority, the general terms of their appointment, and mechanisms for resolving conflict. The editor’s performance may be assessed using mutually agreed-upon measures, including but not necessarily limited to readership, manuscript submissions and handling times, and various journal metrics.

Owners should only dismiss editors for substantial reasons, such as scientific misconduct, disagreement with the long-term editorial direction of the journal, inadequate performance by agreed-upon performance metrics, or inappropriate behavior that is incompatible with a position of trust.

Appointments and dismissals should be based on evaluations by a panel of independent experts, rather than by a small number of executives of the owning organization. This is especially necessary in the case of dismissals because of the high value society places on freedom of speech within science and because it is often the responsibility of editors to challenge the status quo in ways that may conflict with the interests of the journal’s owners.

A medical journal should explicitly state its governance and relationship to a journal owner (eg, a sponsoring society).

2. Editorial Freedom

The ICMJE adopts the World Association of Medical Editors’ definition of editorial freedom, which holds that editors-in-chief have full authority over the entire editorial content of their journal and the timing of publication of that content. Journal owners should not interfere in the evaluation, selection, scheduling, or editing of individual articles either directly or by creating an environment that strongly influences decisions. Editors should base editorial decisions on the validity of the work and its importance to the journal’s readers, not on the commercial implications for the journal, and editors should be free to express critical but responsible views about all aspects of medicine without fear of retribution, even if these views conflict with the commercial goals of the publisher.

Editors-in-chief should also have the final say in decisions about which advertisements or sponsored content, including supplements, the journal will and will not carry, and they should have final say in use of the journal brand and in overall policy regarding commercial use of journal content.

Journals are encouraged to establish an independent editorial advisory board to help the editor establish and maintain editorial policy. Editors should seek to engage a broad and diverse array of authors, reviewers, editorial staff, editorial board members, and readers. To support editorial decisions and potentially controversial expressions of opinion, owners should ensure that appropriate insurance is obtained in the event of legal action against the editors, and should ensure that legal advice is available when necessary.

If legal problems arise, the editor should inform their legal adviser and their owner and/or publisher as soon as possible. Editors should defend the confidentiality of authors and peer-reviewers (names and reviewer comments) in accordance with ICMJE policy (see Section II C.2.a). Editors should take all reasonable steps to check the facts in journal commentary, including that in news sections and social media postings, and should ensure that staff working for the journal adhere to best journalistic practices including contemporaneous note-taking and seeking a response from all parties when possible before publication. Such practices in support of truth and public interest may be particularly relevant in defense against legal allegations of libel.

To secure editorial freedom in practice, the editor should have direct access to the highest level of ownership, not to a delegated manager or administrative officer.

Editors and editors’ organizations are obliged to support the concept of editorial freedom and to draw major transgressions of such freedom to the attention of the international medical, academic, and lay communities.

Source: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/journal-owners-and-editorial-freedom.html

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

A COMPARISON BETWEEN ELECTRONIC AND PRINTED JOURNALS

Vladimir Trajkovski
Institute of Special Education and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Philosophy, University “Ss. Cyril and Methodius, Skopje, Republic of Macedonia
E-mail: vladotra@fzf.ukim.edu.mk
Received: 05-May-2018
Revised: 12-May-2018
Accepted: 14-May-2018
Online first 15-May-2018

Abstract

The number of journals is rapidly rising worldwide. There is public debate about published articles comparing the costs, benefits, and various pros and cons of printed versus electronic full-text journals. The advancement of online journals during recent years has given librarians a powerful new resource to support learning and research.

This article explores issues relating to the print publication process and the electronic publication process in order to clarify the unique advantages and disadvantages of each media. Most commercial sites are subscription-based, or allow pay-per-view access. Many universities subscribe to electronic journals to provide access to their students and faculty, and it is generally also possible for individuals to subscribe. An increasing number of journals are now available with open access, requiring no subscription. This is the case with the Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities. Most working paper archives and articles on personal homepages are free; as are collections in institutional repositories and subject repositories. One of the great advantages of electronic journals is the possibility of acquiring article-level metrics.

Printed journals are portable and convenient, don’t require a device to read, have a high graphical resolution (easier to read) and are self-archiving. Printed journals should continue to survive, but only with a decrease in production and changes in content to suit more restricted niches left in the wake of the electronic journals.

Key words: e-journal, electronic journal, printed journal, academic journal, open access (OA), information technology (IT).

 

Citation: Trajkovski, V. A Comparison Between Electronic and Printed Journals. Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities. 2018 Aug 15; 1(1):1-6. https://doi.org/10.26407/2018jrtdd.1.1

Copyright ©2018 Trajkovski, V. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Corresponding address:
Vladimir Trajkovski
Institute of Special Education and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Philosophy, “Ss Cyril and Methodius” University, 1000 Skopje, Republic of Macedonia.
E-mail: vladotra@fzf.ukim.edu.mk

Full Text Article

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

American English vs. British English in Research Manuscripts: A Free Guide

In a simpler world, English would be written the same way everywhere. However, when Noah Webster set out to create an American English dictionary in the early 1800s, he did more than just add new words to British English: he also revised the spelling of many common words to eliminate what he saw as unnecessary letters. His new spellings were adopted in the US but not the UK, and these spelling differences remain to this day.

American English vs. British English - AJEThe list below is intended to provide an overview of the most common spelling differences between British and American English. The words beginning each list are intended to establish overall patterns, whereas the words in italicstowards the end of the lists are examples of deviations from the rule. Remember that you can choose between “English (U.S.)” and “English (U.K.)” in Microsoft Word when setting the language for your document. This change allows the spell check to help catch these differences in spelling.

Click here to download a list of American English and British English spelling differences for future reference.

-ize (-yze)/-ise

American British
characterize characterise
prioritize prioritise
specialize specialise
analyze analyse
catalyze catalyse
size size
exercise exercise
The products of the catalyzed reaction werecharacterized using specialized equipment. The products of the catalysed reaction werecharacterised using specialised equipment.

-or/-our

American British
behavior behaviour
color colour
favor favour
contour contour
Because of its decolorization behavior, this material is favored. Because of its decolourisation behaviour, this material is favoured.

-er/-re

American British
center centre
fiber fibre
liter litre
parameter parameter
Five milliliters of the mixture containing thefibers was pipetted on the center of the slide. Five millilitres of the mixture containing thefibres was pipetted on the centre of the slide.

e/(ae or oe)

American British
ameba amoeba
anesthesia anaesthesia
diarrhea diarrhoea
leukemia leukaemia
cesium caesium
The leukemia patient was given anesthesiabefore the procedure. The leukaemia patient was given anaesthesiabefore the procedure.

-se/-ce

American British
defense defence
practice (noun and verb) practice (noun)/practise (verb)
license (noun and verb) licence (noun)/license (verb)
defensive defensive
advice (noun)/advise (verb) advice (noun)/advise (verb)
The defense attorney had practiced law for over thirty years. The defence attorney had practised law for over thirty years.

-/e, -og/-ogue

American British
aging ageing
acknowledgment acknowledgement
judgment judgement
analog analogue
dialog dialogue
dying/dyeing (from die/dye) dying/dyeing (from die/dye)
The aging analog-to-digital converter is slowly dying. The ageing analogue-to-digital converter is slowly dying.

-l/-ll OR -ll/-l

American British
fulfill fulfil
enroll enrol
skill, skillful skill, skilful
labeled labelled
signaling signalling
propelled propelled
revealing revealing
The skillful student noted that the drop inenrollment may be signaling a problem with the study design. The skilful student noted that the drop inenrolment may be signalling a problem with the study design.

This list of differences between American English and British English is by no means exhaustive, but we hope that it helps give you an idea of the distinctions between the two styles of writing. If you have questions about any particular word, please contact us.

Source: https://www.aje.com

Tags 
Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

British vs. American English: Spelling Differences in Academic Writing

Dear readers,

In Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities we are using British English. So please adopt your articles to British English. Here are some spelling differences.

There are two main forms of written English – British and American – and most scholarly journals will indicate a preference or requirement for one or the other in their instructions for authors. Even if the guidelines of the journal to which you are hoping to submit your academic or scientific article does not specify whether you should use British or American English, you will be expected to use one form or the other consistently, and your spelling choices will need to be appropriate in every relevant instance. Unfortunately, many authors are not aware of the exact nature of the variations between British and American English, and while setting the default language in Microsoft Word to either British or American can help you catch and correct some misspelled words, it is far from foolproof. Most good English dictionaries will note spelling variations, but some dictionaries do not indicate in all cases whether the variants provided are determined by the differences between the two forms of English. Creating correct British or American English can therefore be challenging, and the following spelling notes may prove helpful as you polish your writing for publication.

• British English often uses ‘our’ (colour, behaviour) where American English uses only ‘or’ (color, behavior).
• British English tends to use ‘re’ at the end of words such as ‘centre’ and ‘metre,’ whereas American English uses ‘er’ (center, meter), but this is not always the case, with ‘parameter’ and ‘sober,’ for instance, correct in both forms of the language.
• British English can use either ‘ise’ or ‘ize’ in verbs that are always spelled with ‘ize’ in American English, so ‘organize’ and ‘specialize’ are correct in American English and can also be correct in British English, but British English can instead use ‘organise’ and ‘specialise.’
• British English uses ‘yse,’ as in ‘analyse’ and ‘paralyse,’ whereas American English uses ‘yze’ (analyze, paralyze).
• British English tends to use ‘ae,’‘oe’ and ‘ou’ in situations where American English uses only ‘e’ or ‘o,’ so ‘aesthetics,’ ‘manoeuvre’ and ‘mould’ are correct in British English, but the spelling would be ‘esthetics,’ ‘maneuver’ and ‘mold’ in American English, though these differences are not always observed.
• In British English ‘defence’ is spelled with a ‘c,’ but in American English the word is spelled with an ‘s’ (defense). The decision to use ‘c’ or ‘s’ can be tricky, however, with British English spelling the nouns ‘practice’ and ‘licence’ differently than the verbs ‘practise’ and ‘license,’ whereas American English uses ‘practice’ for both the noun and the verb and, conversely, ‘license’ for both the noun and the verb.
• British English will often retain an ‘e’ where American English will not, so ‘sizeable’ and ‘acknowledgement’ in British English are ‘sizable’ and ‘acknowledgment’ in American English, but this is not necessarily predictable: ‘judgement,’ for instance, is used in British English, except in legal contexts, in which case the correct form is ‘judgment,’ which is always the correct form in American English, and ‘knowledgeable’ retains its ‘e’ in both forms of the language.
• British English tends to use a single ‘l,’ as in ‘enrol’ and ‘skilful,’ whereas Amercian English uses double ‘ll’ in the same words (enroll, skillful).
• British English often doubles consonants when endings are added to words, as is the case with ‘focussed’ and ‘travelling,’ while American English does not (focused, traveling), but there are exceptions, with ‘enrolling’ the correct form in both.
• British English occasionally uses ‘ph’ (sulphur) where American English uses ‘f’ (sulfur), ‘sc’ (sceptic) where American English uses ‘sk’ (skeptic), ‘que’ (cheque) where American English uses ‘ck’ (check) and ‘ogue’ (catalogue) where American English uses only ‘og’ (catalog), though the two forms of the language do not always differ in the last of these ways, with ‘epilogue,’ for instance, the same in both.
• In some cases British English uses ‘mme’ (programme) where American English uses an ‘m’ alone (program), but this varies, and when ‘program’ applies to computer software, ‘mme’ is never used.

Why our Journal Article Editing and Proofreading Services?
Our dedicated team of journal editors and proofreaders will give you more confidence in the work that you submit after benefiting from our journal proofreading and editing services. The author instructions provided by academic and scientific journals must be followed with precision when preparing a scholarly article for publication or the paper may be rejected without serious consideration of its content; the same problem can arise if an article written in the English language contains too may grammar, spelling and punctuation errors. Our academic and scientific journal editors and proofreaders can help you to ensure that this does not happen to your articles by resolving any problems with your language, adjusting your formatting and references to conform consistently to journal requirements and correcting simple typing errors. Learn more about ourjournal article proofreading and editing services for researchers across all academic and scientific journals.

Proof-Reading-Service.com provides wide-ranging proofreading and editing services for the authors of academic, scientific and professional documents. Our academic and scientific proofreaders and editors are highly educated in many different subject areas and carefully trained to work on documents of all kinds, so whatever sort of document you are writing, we have the experience and expertise to help you improve its grammar, spelling, punctuation, references and formatting until they are polished to perfection. Examples of the many kinds of academic and scientific documents we frequently proofread and edit are listed below, but if the sort of document you are currently writing is not mentioned here, please contact us, as we are sure to have an expert proofreader ready to assist you.

Source: https://www.proof-reading-service.com

JRTDD editor-in-chief

Linkedin   
Whatsapp   

Indexing and abstracting

The journal is indexed with or included in, and registered with the following abstracting partners:

Linkedin   
Whatsapp