Peer Review Policy

1. Introduction

Research Journal upholds the highest standards of academic rigor and scholarly excellence. To ensure the quality and significance of published research, we employ a thorough double-blind peer-review process. This policy outlines the principles, procedures, and expectations governing the review process for all submitted manuscripts.

2. Review Process

  • Initial Screening: All manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial team for compliance with submission guidelines and journal scope.Manuscripts deemed unsuitable will be promptly returned to the authors with an explanation.
  • Reviewer Selection: Qualified reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript's subject area are selected from our international pool of reviewers. We strive for objectivity and avoid potential conflicts of interest.
  • Double-Blind Review: Both reviewers and authors are anonymous throughout the review process. Reviewers are provided with clear evaluation criteria and instructed to assess the manuscript on its originality, methodological soundness, significance, clarity, and contribution to the field.
  • Review Reports: Reviewers submit detailed reports highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, providing constructive criticism, and suggesting necessary revisions.
  • Editorial Decision: The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Associate Editors, considers the reviewers' reports and makes the final decision on the manuscript's fate (accept, reject, revise and resubmit). Authors are notified of the decision along with anonymized reviewer reports.
  • Revision and Appeal: Authors have the opportunity to address reviewers' concerns by submitting a revised manuscript within a specified timeframe. Appeals against editorial decisions are considered on exceptional grounds based on a formal appeal process outlined on the journal website.

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Reviewers are expected to maintain the highest standards of confidentiality and objectivity throughout the review process.
  • Reviews should be thorough, constructive, and respectful of the authors' work.
  • Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts where a conflict exists.
  • Reviews should be submitted promptly within the assigned deadline.

4. Author Responsibilities

  • Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality and scientific accuracy of their work.
  • Manuscripts should be written clearly and concisely, adhering to the journal's formatting guidelines.
  • Authors should respond promptly and professionally to reviewers' comments and editorial requests.
  • Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest.