Standard letter of notification of acceptance of abstract / paper

From KM4Dev Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Back to the Editor Handbook: [1]

Dear author name,

The editorial team for the special issue “NAME OF THE SPECIFIC JOURNAL ISSUE” of the Knowledge Management for Development Journal would like to thank you for submitting an abstract for this issue of the journal.

We are delighted to be able to invite you to submit a full paper based on your abstract "ABSTRACT NAME". We are sure that your paper will be a most valuable contribution to the journal and are looking forward to receiving your submission.

Please note that the deadline for submission of a full paper is DAY MONTH YEAR. Your paper should be sent to on completion.

You can find the guidelines for authors at [2]

Additional details about the paper e.g. requests or suggestions we have for the authors, for example that they should bring in more focus, etc.

Your paper will be subject to a 'peer support' process which will be explained in more detail below. Please note, however, that the relevance of your paper for knowledge management and development is paramount.

Most accredited academic journals have a double-blind peer review process: neither the writer nor the reviewer knows the identity of the other. For the purposes of KM4D Journal, it has been decided to have a peer support process rather than a traditional review process. There are a number of reasons for this:

1. The papers have been through a pre-selection process. The papers have been accepted, in principle, on the basis of the title and abstract.

2. One of the objectives of the journal is to encourage participation of authors who do not have experience of writing for mainstream journals. A peer support process will be better able to support inexperienced authors.

3. In addition, the peer support process will facilitate friendly, collegial contacts between authors and reviewers, supporting networking in the KM4D field.

Submitted articles will generally be reviewed by one 'peer supporter'. This person will usually be a member of the Editorial Board but, in addition, other experts can be requested to review a paper on a one-off basis. Reviewers should be experts in their field either from profession or academic affiliation, and as such will be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Any suggested peer reviewers should not be members of the same organisation or research institution as the authors of the manuscript.

We are looking forward to receiving your article in June.

Kindly acknowledge receipt of this communication.

Best wishes,

YOUR NAME On behalf of the editorial team