The Editorial staff selects the proposals for review, rejecting those deemed undisputedly unsuitable for publication, through consideration of our standards criteria, objectives and the topic range of the journal. Although some proposals are immediately returned, without moving through the reviewers’ assessment, does not mean that the paper does not have potential. Most commonly, it is because there are fundamental issues with the paper, such as the research depth, structure or writing quality, and the editorial team will identify those problems and give you some initial feedback so your paper can be improved before pushing it through the review process. Our interest is to have your paper published, and so we will try to help you improve. Several of those issues can be avoided if you follow the tips that you can find on our website.
If we decide that the paper is ready to advance to the next stage, the peer review, the proposals are then checked and formatted to make sure that no connections with the author remain. Each text will be sent anonymously to two reputable scholars who will necessarily not be from the university of the author and will review the paper accordingly.
Please, be aware that this process takes several months. The reviewers are very busy people, that play very active and important roles in their Universities and of whom several similar paper reviews are requested every week. We (the editorial board members) also have a lot on our hands, several of us are PhD students in the process of writing our thesis, while simultaneously keeping a part or full-time job, besides other activities in which we are involved and of which you can find more on our personal pages. We love doing this, and we are very proud of NEO, but it is impossible to do it full time. You will find that this lengthy process common in every journal. It is the price to pay for scientific rigor, and you will have to get used to it.