Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. IJAR shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.


Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.


Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.


Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.


Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Peer Review Process :

Initial Screening: Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial team to ensure they meet the journal's scope and formatting guidelines.

Peer Review: Submissions that pass the initial screening are sent for peer review. IJIR follows a double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed.

Reviewer Selection: Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and knowledge in the relevant field. They are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, significance, methodology, and clarity.

Decision Making: Based on the reviewers' comments, the editorial team makes a decision on whether to accept, reject, or request revisions to the manuscript. Authors are notified of the decision along with the reviewers' comments.

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback on the manuscript. Reviewers should maintain confidentiality and not disclose any information about the manuscript or the review process. Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest that may affect their impartiality.