Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
Journal of Mayada Interdisciplinary Studies (JMAIS) applies a double-blind peer review process, whereby the identities of both the author(s) and the reviewer(s) remain concealed from each other throughout the entire review process. This mechanism is implemented to ensure that every submitted manuscript is evaluated objectively, fairly, and solely on the basis of its academic quality, originality, and scientific contribution, free from any potential bias related to the author's identity, affiliation, gender, or nationality.
The peer review procedure consists of the following stages:
- Initial Editorial Screening — Upon submission, the manuscript is first reviewed by the editorial team to assess its compliance with the journal's focus and scope, formatting guidelines, and writing standards. At this stage, a similarity check is also conducted using plagiarism detection software to ensure the originality of the manuscript.
- Reviewer Assignment — Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a minimum of two independent reviewers who possess relevant expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. All identifying information of the author(s), such as name, affiliation, and acknowledgments, is removed from the manuscript prior to being sent to reviewers.
- Double-Blind Review — Reviewers evaluate the manuscript without knowledge of the author's identity, while the author remains unaware of the reviewers assigned to their manuscript. Reviewers assess the manuscript based on several criteria, including originality and novelty, research methodology, theoretical and/or practical significance, clarity of presentation, and the validity of the analysis and conclusions, as well as the accuracy and relevance of citations and references.
- Review Recommendation — Each reviewer provides one of the following recommendations: Accept Submission, Minor Revisions Required, Major Revisions Required, or Reject Submission, accompanied by detailed comments and constructive feedback for the author(s).
- Editorial Decision — Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editor-in-chief or the assigned section editor makes the final decision regarding the manuscript's status. In cases where reviewers' recommendations differ significantly, the editor may seek an additional review from a third reviewer.
- Revision and Resubmission — Authors are given the opportunity to revise their manuscript according to the reviewers' comments within a specified period. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation, if deemed necessary.
- Final Decision and Notification — The final decision (accepted, rejected, or requiring further revision) is communicated to the author(s) along with the reviewers' comments, while maintaining the confidentiality of the reviewers' identities.
The entire review process is generally completed within one to two weeks, depending on the availability and responsiveness of the reviewers. All parties involved in the review process, including editors and reviewers, are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript's content and to declare any potential conflicts of interest prior to accepting a review assignment.
