Peer Review Policy
IASR Multidisciplinary Journal uses peer review to assess the quality, originality, relevance, and academic merit of submitted manuscripts. The journal aims to maintain a fair, impartial, and constructive review process while protecting the confidentiality of authors and reviewers.
1. Initial Editorial Assessment
All manuscripts received by the journal are first assessed by the editorial office. At this stage, the editors consider the manuscript's relevance to the journal's scope, basic quality, originality, presentation, and compliance with the journal's submission requirements.
A manuscript may be declined at this stage if it is outside the journal's scope, does not meet the basic requirements for consideration, or has substantial academic, methodological, or ethical concerns.
Passing the initial assessment does not guarantee acceptance or publication.
2. External Peer Review
Manuscripts considered suitable for further evaluation are normally sent for external peer review. The journal generally seeks comments from at least two reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject of the manuscript.
Reviewers are selected based on their relevant knowledge and experience. The journal makes reasonable efforts to ensure that reviewers can provide an independent and objective assessment.
3. Review Model
The journal generally follows a double-anonymized peer-review process, where the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to each other during the review process.
Authors should therefore ensure that the manuscript files submitted for review do not unnecessarily reveal their identities.
4. What Reviewers Are Asked to Assess
Reviewers are expected to consider, as appropriate to the article type:
- Originality and relevance of the work;
- Clarity of the research question or objectives;
- Appropriateness of the methodology;
- Accuracy and adequacy of the analysis;
- Presentation and interpretation of results;
- Quality and relevance of references;
- Clarity and organization of the manuscript; and
- Ethical and research-integrity considerations.
Reviewers are encouraged to provide clear and constructive comments that can help authors improve their manuscripts.
5. Reviewer Confidentiality
Manuscripts submitted for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers should not share, reproduce, distribute, or use unpublished information from a manuscript for personal or professional purposes.
Reviewer comments should be written professionally and should focus on the manuscript rather than the authors personally.
6. Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers and editors should disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their independent assessment of a manuscript. Individuals with a significant conflict should not participate in the review or editorial decision-making process.
Further details are provided in the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy.
7. Editorial Decisions
After considering the reviewers' comments and the editor's own assessment, the manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
Reviewer recommendations are considered carefully, but the final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the editor.
The number of review rounds may vary depending on the manuscript and the extent of revisions required.
8. Revisions
When revisions are requested, authors should address the reviewers' comments carefully and provide a clear response explaining how each substantive concern has been addressed.
A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers when the editor considers further review necessary.
9. Appeals
Authors who believe that an editorial decision was affected by a significant error or misunderstanding may submit an appeal to the editorial office.
An appeal should clearly explain the reason for the request and provide relevant supporting information. Appeals are considered by the editorial team and do not guarantee reversal of the original decision.
10. Reviewer Selection and Suggested Reviewers
The journal selects reviewers based on subject expertise, academic or research experience, and availability.
Authors may suggest potential reviewers during submission where the OJS submission system permits. Such suggestions are considered at the editor's discretion and do not guarantee that the suggested individuals will be invited.
11. Ethical Concerns During Review
If a reviewer identifies a serious concern relating to plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or manipulated data, unethical research, or another potential breach of research integrity, the concern should be communicated confidentially to the editor.
The journal may investigate such concerns in accordance with its Publication Ethics & Malpractice Policy.
12. Post-Publication Concerns
Peer review does not end the journal's responsibility for maintaining the integrity of the published record. If a credible concern is raised about a published article, the journal may investigate and, where appropriate, publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction.
13. Commitment to Fair Review
IASR Multidisciplinary Journal is committed to conducting peer review in a manner that is fair, respectful, confidential, and independent. Editorial decisions are based primarily on the scholarly quality, relevance, originality, methodological soundness, and ethical standards of the work.
