Author Guidelines

 Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

RJSD takes copyright infringement, plagiarism, or other violations of best practices in publishing very seriously. Authors should submit a declaration of originality of the paper along with the manuscript. Also, include statements about conflict of interest and funding information.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

RJSD takes copyright infringement, plagiarism, or other violations of best practices in publishing very seriously. Authors should submit a declaration of originality of the paper along with the manuscript. Also, include statements about conflict of interest and funding information.

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

The reviewers are expected to maintain absolute confidentiality with regard to the contents of manuscripts. The reviews are to be conducted objectively and the referees are expected to express their views clearly with supporting reasons. The reviewers should have no conflict of interest with the authors and the subject matter of the research. The reviewers are required to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation or argument which has been previously reported should also be accompanied by the relevant citation. Similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other published paper of which the reviewer may have personal knowledge may also be brought to be the attention of the editors. The information or ideas obtained through peer review are of a privileged nature and must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties and Responsibilities of Author(s)

Authors should submit original research work. Authors are required to ensure that the submitted work has not been published elsewhere. If the authors have used the work of others, the same should be appropriately cited or quoted. Applicable copyright laws and conventions are required to be followed. Copyrighted materials should be reproduced only with the permission and due acknowledgment.

• Authors are not expected to submit manuscripts containing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is not allowed and, if discovered, would result in the rejection of the paper.
• The case of multiple authors, it is expected that all the authors should have significantly contributed to the research. The corresponding author should ensure that the names of all co-authors are included in the paper. Also, the co-author should have approved the final version of the paper.
• The authors should examine the proof of the manuscript and give consent for publication if accepted.
• The corresponding author should ensure that all coauthors have agreed to the submission of the paper to the journal for publication.
• All sources of financial support should be mentioned.

 Plagiarism

For every Journal, the peer review process is at the heart of the success of publishing. As part of our commitment to the protection and enhancement of the peer review process, the Rajagiri Journal of Social Development would like to ensure that all published articles are within the accepted level of plagiarism. The Journal uses the very well and widely accepted Plagiarism Detection tool, Turnitin. All submitted Manuscripts are first subjected to a Plagiarism check, and then the Publishing cycle begins. If plagiarism is detected during the review/editorial process, such manuscript(s) will be rejected immediately. We can also consider other steps depending on the seriousness of the case. If the plagiarism is proven after publication, such manuscript(s) will be removed from our website, and an appropriate announcement will be placed in this regard, with due notification to the author’s institute and funding agencies if any.

Conflict of Interest

All authors are expected to disclose, in the manuscript submitted letter, any commercial affiliations as well as consultancies, stock or equity interests, and patent-licensing arrangements that could be considered to pose a conflict of interest regarding the submitted manuscript. Examples of potential conflicting interests include relationships, financial or otherwise, that might detract from an author's objectivity in the presentation of study results and interests whose value would be enhanced by the results presented. Details of the disclosure to the editor will remain confidential. It is important to note that the inclusion of a company name in the author address lines of the manuscript does not constitute disclosure.

All funding sources for the study, institutional and corporate, should be credited in the Acknowledgments section. In addition, if a manuscript concerns a commercial product, the manufacturer's name must be indicated in the Materials and Methods section or elsewhere in the text, as appropriate, in an obvious manner.

Peer Review Policy

Journal of Social Development follows a strict double-blind review policy in which the identity of the reviewer and the author are always concealed from both parties. After carefully considering the reviewers’ comments, the editor may accept or reject manuscripts. Accepted papers that need revision (s) will be returned to the authors. The authors are encouraged to resubmit the revised paper within the specified time frame.

Initial Manuscript Evaluation

The Editors first evaluate all manuscripts. In some circumstances, it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review.

Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2-4 weeks of receipt.

How the Reviewer Is Selected

Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our reviewer database contains reviewer contact details together with their subject areas of interest, and this is constantly being updated.

 Reviewer Reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

• Is original
• Is methodologically sound
• Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
• Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
• Correctly references previous relevant work

Reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. Reviewers are requested to refrain from giving their personal opinion in the “Reviewer blind comments to Author” section of their review on whether or not the paper should be published. Personal opinions can be expressed in the “Reviewer confidential comments to Editor” section.

How Long Does the Peer Review Process Take?

Typically, the manuscript will be reviewed within 2-8 weeks. Should the reviewers’ reports contradict one another or a report be unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the Editors within 3 weeks and the Editors may request further advice from the reviewers at this time. The Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript.

Final Report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers, and may include verbatim comments by the editors.

Editor's Decision is Final

Reviewers’ recommendation to the Editors, who are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript.

Special Issues/Conference Proceedings

Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organisers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.

Becoming a Reviewer for the Rajagiri Journal of Social Development

If you are not currently a reviewer for the Rajagiri Journal of Social Development but would like to be considered as a reviewer for this Journal, please contact the editorial office by e-mail at [email protected] and provide your contact details. If your request is approved and you are added to the online reviewer database you will receive a confirmatory email, asking you to add details on your field of expertise, in the format of subject classifications.

  INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS

Publication Charges

There are no submission fees, publication fees or page charges for this journal.

Style Guideline

The Rajagiri Journal of Social Development publishes original articles on the theme of social development — on theoretical or field based topics related to social development, social issues, or programmes of development. Academic articles may be of 6000-10000 words. Shorter papers on development initiatives or anecdotes of social intervention “from the field” are also welcome. Articles will be accepted for publication on the recommendation of peer-referees.

A copy of the article together with an abstract in 150-200 words may be sent in the form of soft copy in Microsoft Word (as email attachment) with the signed declaration that its contents have not been published earlier and it has not been sent anywhere else for publication.

Notes are serially numbered as they appear in the text of the article and placed at the end of the text.

References: Within the text of the article reference is made in parenthesis using the last name of the author and the year of publication as for example (Gore, 2003). If more than one work of the same author are cited, the years of publication of the works are separated with coma as (Gore, 1982, 2003). If two or more works of the same author in the same year are cited, they are distinguished with the alphabets a, b, etc. as (Gore, 1998a, 1998b). When more than one author are cited, the authors are separated with semicolon, as (Gore, 2003; Mukherji, 2004). For works authored by three or more authors, et al. is used after the first author, as (Gore et al., 1999). Page number of the citation is given after the year of publication followed by colon as (Gore, 2003: 84).

The list of References at the end of the article will have all and only those sources (books, articles in journals, contributions in edited volumes and online documents) that are cited within the text. Names of all the authors of a work are given in the list of References at the end; ef al. is used only within the text. Details of the sources in alphabetical order of the last name of the (first) author are given as follows. In the case of books: author’s name, year of publication, title of the book in italics, place of publication and name of publishers. For example: Gore, M. S. (2003). Challenges Faced in an Unequal and Plural Society. Jaipur: Rawat Publications. In the case of articles, published in journals: author’s name, year of publication, title of the article in inverted comas, name of the journal in italics, volume number with issue number, and the beginning and ending page numbers. For example: Bhandari, Mala. (2004). “Women in Two Work Roles and the Quality of Their Life”. Sociological Bulletin-53 (1): 94-104. In the case of contributions in edited books: author’s name, year of publication, title of the contribution in inverted comas, editor’s name, title of the book in italics, the beginning and ending page numbers of the contribution in the book, place of publication and name of publishers. For example: Oommen, T. K. (2004). “Institution Building in South Asia: Dilemmas and Experiences”. in Partha Nath Mukherji and Chandan Sengupta (eds.). Indigeneity and Universality in Social Science (255-267). New Delhi: Sage Publications. Online sources may contain author’s name, year, title of the document, URL and date of accessing the reference. For example: Wikipedia (2009). Caste System in India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India. accessed on [November 2009.