Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy - Journal of Manuscript Studies

At the Journal of Manuscript Studies, we uphold a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to ensure the highest quality of scholarly contributions. Our commitment to academic excellence is reflected in the following peer-review policy:

1. Objective Evaluation:
- Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Manuscript Studies undergo a thorough and impartial evaluation by experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, ensuring a comprehensive and objective assessment.

2. Blind Peer Review:
- Our peer-review process follows a double-blind model, where the identities of both the authors and reviewers are kept confidential. This approach eliminates potential biases, fostering an unbiased evaluation of the manuscript's content.

3. Reviewer Selection:
- Reviewers are chosen based on their expertise, scholarly achievements, and familiarity with the subject matter of the submitted manuscript. We aim to include diverse perspectives to ensure a comprehensive evaluation.

4. Prompt and Constructive Feedback:
- Reviewers are expected to provide timely and constructive feedback to authors. The feedback should focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, guiding authors in improving the clarity, methodology, and overall quality of their work.

5. Ethical Considerations:
- Reviewers are required to report any potential ethical concerns, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or undisclosed conflicts of interest. This ensures the integrity of the research and maintains the trust of our readership.

6. Confidentiality:
- Reviewers must treat the manuscripts as confidential documents. The content of the manuscripts and the peer-review process should not be disclosed to unauthorized individuals or shared without explicit consent from the editorial team.

7. Feedback Consistency:
- Our editorial team ensures that feedback provided by multiple reviewers is consistent. In cases where there are conflicting opinions, the editorial team facilitates a constructive dialogue to arrive at fair and informed decisions.

8. Author-Reviewer Communication:
- Authors receive anonymous feedback from reviewers to aid in the revision process. Communication between authors and reviewers is facilitated through the editorial team to maintain the integrity of the peer-review process.

9. Editorial Decision:
- The final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection is made by the editorial team, taking into consideration the feedback provided by reviewers. The decision is communicated to authors along with the reviewers' comments.

The Journal of Manuscript Studies is grateful for the invaluable contributions of our peer reviewers. Their dedication to maintaining academic rigor ensures the publication of high-quality research that advances the field of manuscript studies. We appreciate their commitment to scholarly excellence.