Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Stanzaleaf International Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies (SLIJMS) follows a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and academic credibility of all published manuscripts. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process to maintain objectivity and fairness.

Review Workflow

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the editorial office to determine:

  • Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope

  • Compliance with submission guidelines

  • Basic originality and academic suitability

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts passing the initial screening are sent to two independent expert reviewers. Both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other.

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and significance of the research

  • Methodological rigour and validity

  • Clarity of presentation and structure

  • Ethical compliance and appropriate referencing

  • Contribution to existing knowledge

3. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept without revision

  • Accept with minor revisions

  • Major revisions required

  • Reject

Constructive and objective feedback is provided to authors to improve the manuscript.

4. Editorial Decision

The final decision on each manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief or Co-Editors-in-Chief based on reviewer reports and editorial judgment. The decision is communicated to the corresponding author.

5. Revision and Final Acceptance

Authors must submit revised manuscripts addressing reviewer comments within the stipulated time. Revised submissions may be re-reviewed before final acceptance.

Review Timeline

The standard peer review process typically takes 2 to 4 days, depending on the availability of reviewers and the extent of revisions required.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts and review reports are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or use unpublished material for personal research purposes.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers and editors are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest. Individuals with conflicts must recuse themselves from the review process.

Ethical Oversight

The journal takes all allegations of ethical misconduct seriously. Suspected cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research practices are investigated according to the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Transparency and Integrity

SLIJMS is committed to maintaining transparency, fairness, and integrity in the peer review process to uphold the trust of authors, reviewers, and readers.