Peer Review Process

International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Studies (IJMRAS)
ISSN: 2640-7272 | Open Access | Double-Blind Peer-Reviewed Journal

The International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Studies (IJMRS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, and transparent double-blind peer review process. All submitted manuscripts undergo independent evaluation by qualified experts to ensure originality, academic quality, methodological soundness, and ethical compliance.

Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, manuscripts are initially assessed by the Editorial Office to determine:

  • Relevance to the journal's aims and scope

  • Compliance with author guidelines

  • Originality and scholarly merit

  • Ethical compliance

  • Similarity and plagiarism screening

Manuscripts that do not satisfy these requirements may be returned to authors for revision or declined prior to external review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial assessment are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area.

Under the double-blind review model:

  • Authors remain anonymous to reviewers.

  • Reviewers remain anonymous to authors.

  • Editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge

  • Research design and methodology

  • Significance and relevance of findings

  • Accuracy and validity of results

  • Quality of discussion and conclusions

  • Ethical standards

  • Quality of references, figures, and tables

  • Clarity of language and presentation

Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewer recommendations, one of the following decisions may be issued:

  1. Accept

  2. Minor Revision

  3. Major Revision

  4. Reject

Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests are expected to submit:

  • A revised manuscript

  • A detailed response to reviewer comments

  • Explanations of all changes made

Revised manuscripts may be subject to further review when necessary.

Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final publication decision based on:

  • Reviewer reports

  • Quality of revisions

  • Editorial standards

  • Publication ethics requirements

Publication Ethics and Confidentiality

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents throughout the review process.

Reviewers and editors are expected to:

  • Maintain confidentiality

  • Declare conflicts of interest

  • Provide objective and constructive evaluations

  • Report suspected ethical concerns or research misconduct

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a formal appeal regarding editorial decisions. Appeals are reviewed independently by the Editorial Board, and the final determination rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Research Integrity and AI Disclosure

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of submitted work. Any use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in manuscript preparation must be disclosed appropriately. AI systems cannot be listed as authors.

Publication Timeline

The journal aims to provide timely editorial decisions while maintaining rigorous quality standards. Review and publication timelines may vary depending on manuscript complexity and reviewer availability.

Peer Review Workflow

Submission → Editorial Assessment → Plagiarism Screening → Double-Blind Peer Review → Revision (if required) → Final Decision → Production & DOI Assignment → Publication