Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Advances Research in Digital and Interdisciplinary Methods (JARDIM) employs a double-blind peer review process to ensure the integrity, quality, and fairness of the review process. In a double-blind review, both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process.

 

Process Overview

Initial Manuscript Screening

  • Upon submission, the editorial office screens manuscripts to ensure they fit the journal’s scope and comply with submission guidelines.

  • Manuscripts that do not meet these standards may be rejected at this stage.

Assignment to Editors

  • Manuscripts passing initial screening are assigned to a subject editor, who oversees the peer review process and identifies suitable reviewers based on expertise.

Selection of Reviewers

  • The editor invites two or more independent experts in the relevant field to review the manuscript.

  • Reviewers are chosen for their subject-matter expertise and ability to provide objective, constructive feedback.

Double-Blind Review

  • Authors’ identities are hidden from reviewers.

  • Reviewers’ identities are kept confidential from authors.

  • This ensures the review is unbiased and focused solely on the manuscript’s content.

 

Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  1. Originality and significance of the research.

  2. Clarity of presentation and manuscript structure.

  3. Adequacy of methodology and research design.

  4. Accuracy of data analysis and interpretation.

  5. Relevance of conclusions and recommendations.

  6. Adequacy of references and literature review.

  7. Ethical standards and proper acknowledgment of sources.

 

Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend:

  • Accept without changes: Manuscript is ready for publication.

  • Accept with minor revisions: Manuscript can be accepted after minor changes.

  • Major revisions required: Significant changes are needed before reconsideration.

  • Reject: Manuscript is not suitable for publication in JARDIM.

 

Author Revision

  • If revisions are required, authors are asked to make changes and resubmit the manuscript.

  • Revised manuscripts may undergo further review to ensure changes are satisfactory.

 

Final Decision

  • The editor makes the final decision based on reviewer feedback and author revisions.

  • Decisions are communicated along with reviewers’ comments.

 

Review Timeframe

  • JARDIM aims to complete peer review within 4 to 8 weeks from submission.

  • The timeframe may vary depending on manuscript complexity and reviewer availability.

 

Confidentiality

  • Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents and not share them outside the review process.

 

Ethical Considerations

  • Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect impartiality.

  • If a reviewer feels unable to provide an objective review, they must inform the editor and recuse themselves.

 

Appeal Process

  • Authors may appeal editorial decisions if they believe a decision was unfair.

  • Appeals must include a detailed explanation.

  • The editorial board may seek additional opinions from external reviewers before making a final decision.