Peer Review Process

The IJARSMT peer review process is designed to ensure rigorous quality, impartiality, and academic excellence. The following steps outline our editorial workflow, as illustrated in below mentioned workflow diagram:

Our Peer Review Workflow

  • Initial Editorial Screening: Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary review to verify that the manuscript aligns with the journal's scope and formatting standards. A strict plagiarism check is performed, requiring a similarity index of less than 30%.

  • Double-Blind Peer Review Assignment: To maintain impartiality, the anonymized manuscript is sent to at least two independent subject-matter experts who specialize in the relevant research domain.

  • Reviewers' Evaluation: The selected reviewers provide a detailed assessment of the manuscript’s originality, methodology, clarity of presentation, and relevance. They submit their constructive feedback along with a recommendation for acceptance, revision, or rejection.

  • Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editorial board makes one of three decisions:

    • Accepted: The paper meets all standards and moves to the final stages.

    • Revision Required: The author is notified of the required minor or major corrections.

    • Rejected: The paper does not meet the necessary standards, and the author is notified accordingly.

  • Author Revision: If revisions are requested, the author must address the reviewers' comments and resubmit the updated manuscript within the established deadline.

  • Final Acceptance & Copyediting: Once revisions are verified by the Editor, the paper is officially accepted, formatted, and sent to the author for final proofing.

  • Final Publication: The accepted article is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and published online in the upcoming bi-monthly issue as an Open Access paper.