Guidelines to Authors 

Frontier Anthropology is a peer-reviewed journal following the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE: https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers). The peer reviewer is responsible for the critical appraisal of the manuscript after thorough reading and evaluation. This would enhance the quality of the manuscript. The reviewer will provide constructive feedback to improve the manuscript, identifying its weaknesses and significance. The peer reviewer will also evaluate the novelty, methodological constraints and relevance of the research problem in anthropological knowledge.
Thorough peer review is a time-consuming task but is essential to ensure the quality of scientific journals. The Editorial Team of Frontier Anthropology is thankful to all the reviewers who agreed to review the manuscript submitted to the journal despite their busy schedules. The time and effort invested by these reviewers will help establish Frontier Anthropology as a better platform.
The review of the manuscript submitted for publication in Frontier Anthropology is done through a double-blind review process. Per journal policy, the authors’ identities are kept confidential from reviewers, and reviewers’ identities are kept confidential from authors. We follow specific regulations to identify potential reviewers based on the study area. Decisions to accept or reject the manuscript for publication solely depend on the novelty, rationality, contribution to the current anthropological knowledge, and reviewers' recommendations.
Before Reviewing
The reviewer should check the study area before accepting the manuscript for review, and the area should be within his/her expertise. If the reviewer cannot review the manuscript, he/she may decline the review request and is encouraged to suggest an alternative reviewer. The reviewer is requested to complete the manuscript review within a month of receipt of the manuscript. The reviewer can decline to review manuscripts in which he/she has conflicts of interest with any associates of the manuscripts - the authors, companies, institutions, collaborators and others. If any problem arises in reviewing the manuscript, the reviewer can contact the Editorial Team of Frontier Anthropology at frontieranthropology@gmail.com

The Review
The reviewer needs to focus on the following important points while reviewing the manuscript
1. Content Quality and Novelty
The reviewers are requested to check the manuscript's quality, rationality, and novelty that will add up the existing knowledge of anthropological queries and related areas. Apart from this, the reviewer also needs to see whether the article adheres to the journal’s standards.
2. Organisation and Clarity
While reviewing the manuscript, the reviewers are asked to scrutinise the manuscript deeply to check whether the following conditions are fulfilled
i) Title: The title should clearly describe the theme of the article.
ii) Abstract: The abstract should reflect the content of the article.
iii) Introduction: The introduction should give a background of the research problem or review relevant articles to provide the study's rationale. It should discuss the arguments in the proposed research work or the hypothesis.
iv) Method: The author should explain the methodology in detail, such as how the data were collected, study design, techniques involved in the data collection, variables used in the study, and measurement, if any. The method should also cover the sampling procedure and statistical analysis. The reviewer also needs to verify whether the author(s) adhered to ethical considerations when collecting the data.
v) Results: The author(s) must present the study's findings in a prominent, logical and sequential way. For the quantitative study, the findings must be presented alongside the tables and figures. The reviewer will check for any inconsistencies between the figures cited in tables or figures and the text. For qualitative research, the reviewer(s) will check for the continuity and consistency of the data presented.
vi) Conclusion/Discussion: The discussion must be precise and discussed based on the findings. The discussion should provide direction for the research question or contribute to existing knowledge. Apart from this, the discussion should also point out the limitations and significance of the study. The conclusion should be precise and indicate the future perspective of the study.
vii) Tables, Figures, Images: The reviewer(s) will check the appropriateness and informative value of the tables, figures, and images.
viii) References: The review will see whether the author(s) follow the APA style of referencing both in-text and at the end of the manuscript.

3. General Comment: The reviewer can give general comments on the manuscript, such as English grammatical errors, poor presentation of the manuscript, etc. The reviewer also will see if there is any plagiarism or fraud. If there is, please report it to the Editorial team.

Next Steps
Please submit the “Reviewer’s Comments” form before the due date. The reviewer’s recommendation for an article will be strongly considered when the editors make their decision. The reviewer’s thorough, honest feedback will be much appreciated in this regard.

Contact Us:

Department of Anthropology
Manipur University, Imphal
Manipur - 795003 (India)
Email: frontieranthropology@gmail.com