The Global Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (GJMR) follows a rigorous, transparent, and impartial peer review process to ensure the quality and credibility of the research it publishes. This peer review policy outlines the key elements of the review process that uphold the journal’s standards of academic integrity and scientific excellence.
1. Peer Review Type: GJMR follows a double-blind peer review process, where both the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from one another. This approach helps eliminate bias and ensures a fair and unbiased evaluation of the research.
2. Initial Screening: Upon submission, each manuscript is first reviewed by the editorial team for compliance with the journal's scope, format, and basic quality standards. If the manuscript does not meet the criteria, it may be rejected at this stage without undergoing the peer review process.
3. Selection of Reviewers:
- Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. The editorial board works to ensure that each manuscript is evaluated by knowledgeable experts who are familiar with the research topic.
- We aim to use a diverse group of reviewers from various academic institutions and regions to ensure a wide range of perspectives.
- Reviewers are selected based on their experience, qualifications, and previous work in the relevant field, ensuring that the feedback is both relevant and constructive.
4. Review Process:
- Once a manuscript passes the initial screening, it is sent to two or more independent reviewers for evaluation.
- Reviewers are asked to provide detailed, constructive feedback on the quality, originality, methodology, and relevance of the research. They also assess the manuscript’s clarity, accuracy, and contribution to the field.
- The reviewers submit their comments and recommendations, which may include: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection.
- The final decision regarding the manuscript's acceptance or rejection is made by the editor-in-chief, who takes the reviewers' feedback into account.
5. Reviewer Responsibilities:
- Impartiality: Reviewers must assess the manuscript impartially and provide objective feedback.
- Confidentiality: Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality regarding the manuscript and its contents.
- Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within a reasonable timeframe, typically within 2-3 weeks.
- Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide clear, detailed comments to help authors improve their work. Negative feedback should be delivered in a respectful and professional manner.
- Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest that may influence their judgment on the manuscript.
6. Author Responsibilities:
- Authors are expected to respond to reviewer comments and suggestions in a timely and comprehensive manner.
- Revisions should be clearly highlighted in the revised manuscript, and authors must submit a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments.
- Authors are required to adhere to the journal’s ethical standards, ensuring their work is original, properly referenced, and free from plagiarism.
7. Revision and Resubmission: If the reviewers recommend revisions, the authors will be provided with feedback, and they must revise their manuscript accordingly. The revised manuscript will then be re-reviewed by the same or new reviewers to ensure that the revisions have been adequately addressed.
8. Final Decision: Based on the reviewers' feedback and the author's revision, the editor-in-chief will make the final decision. This decision could be:
- Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication.
- Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires some minor changes before it is accepted.
- Major Revisions: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and may need to be resubmitted for another round of review.
- Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.
9. Ethical Guidelines:
- GJMR follows the highest ethical standards in academic publishing, including the principles outlined in the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.
- Any instance of suspected plagiarism, fabrication of data, or other ethical violations will result in the manuscript being rejected.
10. Transparency and Accountability:
- GJMR maintains transparency in its peer review process, ensuring that all submissions are handled fairly and without bias.
- The peer review process is confidential, but we encourage reviewers to provide clear and detailed feedback to aid in the improvement of the manuscript.
Through this structured and ethical peer review process, GJMR aims to maintain the integrity of the research it publishes, ensuring that only the highest quality, impactful, and original work is disseminated to the academic community.
