Purpose

 The peer review process of the Jamal Academic Research Journal-An Interdisciplinary (JARJ) serves to uphold the integrity and quality of scholarly research in Multidisciplinary subjects. It ensures that published articles meet precise standards of novelty, significance, and methodological reliability.

Types of Review

JARJ employs a double-blind peer review process, where both the identities of authors and reviewers are kept anonymous to each other. This ensures impartial evaluation and fosters a fair assessment of each submission.

Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers for JARJ are selected based on their expertise and experience in relevant areas of social science Multidisciplinary subject research. They are chosen to provide insightful and constructive feedback on submitted manuscripts.

Review Criteria

Manuscripts submitted to JARJ are evaluated based on criteria such as originality, significance, theoretical and methodological accuracy, clarity of presentation, and adherence to ethical standards in research.

Conflicts of Interest

 Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could bias their evaluation of a manuscript. Any conflicts identified are carefully managed to ensure unbiased and impartial reviews.

Timelines

JARJ is committed to maintaining efficient review timelines. Authors can expect timely feedback on their submissions, with clear deadlines provided for reviewers to submit their reports.

Reviewer Guidelines

 Reviewers are provided with guidelines outlining expectations for their reviews, including the provision of constructive feedback, confidentiality, and adherence to ethical standards.

Decision Making

 The editorial board of JARJ considers reviewers comments and recommendations in making decisions regarding manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection. Decisions are based on the overall quality and suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal.

Author Response

Authors are given the opportunity to respond to reviewers comments and suggestions. Any revisions made in response to reviewer feedback are considered in the final decision-making process.

 Publication Ethics

JARJ upholds the highest standards of publication ethics and expects authors to adhere to principles of academic integrity, including proper citation practices, avoidance of plagiarism, and ethical treatment of research subjects.

Appeals Process

 JARJ provides authors with the opportunity to appeal editorial decisions in cases where they think there has been a procedural error or misunderstanding. Appeals are considered carefully by the editorial board.

Transparency

 JARJ is committed to transparency in the peer review process. While reviewer identities are kept confidential, reviewer comments may be shared with authors to facilitate transparency and accountability.

Revision Policy

Authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit manuscripts based on reviewer feedback. Revised submissions undergo further evaluation to ensure that all concerns raised during the initial review process have been adequately addressed.

Updates and Changes

The peer review policy of JARJ may be periodically reviewed and updated to reflect evolving best practices and standards in academic publishing. Any changes to the policy will be communicated clearly to authors and reviewers.