Peer Review Policy

  1. Purpose:

The peer review process is integral to maintaining the high standards and academic rigor of the International Journal of Religion and Humanities (IJRH). Peer review ensures the validity, quality, and originality of the research published in the journal. This policy outlines the guidelines and procedures for the peer review process at IJRH.

  1. Types of Peer Review:

IJRH employs a double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential. This ensures impartiality and fairness in evaluating submissions. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the relevant field to provide insightful and constructive feedback to authors.

  1. Review Criteria:

Submissions to IJRH are evaluated based on the following criteria:

  • Originality: Novelty and uniqueness of the research contribution.
  • Significance: Relevance and importance of the research to the field of religion and humanities.
  • Methodology: Soundness and appropriateness of research methods employed.
  • Clarity and Coherence: Clear presentation of ideas and logical coherence in the manuscript.
  • Ethical Considerations: Adherence to ethical standards in research conduct and reporting.
  1. Review Process:

Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial office to ensure compliance with journal guidelines. Submissions meeting the basic criteria are then assigned to appropriate reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide detailed comments and recommendations to the editor.

  1. Editorial Decision:

Based on the feedback received from reviewers, the editor makes a decision regarding the manuscript. The possible decisions include:

  • Acceptance: The manuscript meets the standards of the journal and is accepted for publication.
  • Revision: Minor or major revisions are required before acceptance. Authors are given the opportunity to address reviewers' comments and revise their manuscript accordingly.
  • Rejection: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards and is rejected for publication.
  1. Confidentiality:

All parties involved in the peer review process, including authors, reviewers, and editors, must maintain confidentiality regarding the content of submissions and reviewer comments. Reviewers are expected to disclose any conflicts of interest that may affect their impartiality.

  1. Timeliness:

IJRH is committed to ensuring timely review and publication of manuscripts. Authors can expect to receive initial feedback on their submissions within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers are encouraged to submit their evaluations promptly to expedite the review process.

  1. Appeals:

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions if they believe there has been a procedural error or if they can provide additional evidence to support their manuscript. Appeals are handled by the editor-in-chief in consultation with the editorial board.

  1. Revision Policy:

Authors are given a reasonable timeframe to revise their manuscripts based on reviewers' feedback. Revised manuscripts should address all reviewer comments adequately. Failure to address reviewers' concerns may result in rejection of the manuscript.

  1. Continuous Improvement:

IJRH continuously strives to improve the peer review process to ensure fairness, transparency, and efficiency. Feedback from authors, reviewers, and readers is welcomed and used to refine the journal's peer review policies and procedures.