Editorial Process
The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research applies a transparent editorial process designed to ensure academic quality, fairness, originality, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution. All manuscripts are handled according to clear editorial procedures from submission to final decision.
Initial Editorial Screening
After submission, each manuscript is first reviewed by the editorial office. This initial screening evaluates whether the manuscript fits the journal’s scope, follows submission guidelines, includes required metadata, meets basic academic standards, and complies with ethical expectations.
Manuscripts may be returned to authors before peer review if they are outside the journal’s scope, incomplete, poorly prepared, ethically problematic, excessively similar to previously published work, or unsuitable for academic review.
Peer Review Process
The journal applies an external double-blind peer review process. The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential during the review process. Each manuscript is normally evaluated by independent reviewers with relevant expertise.
Reviewers assess originality, theoretical contribution, methodological clarity, literature engagement, academic language, ethical compliance, and relevance to the field. Reviewer comments are considered carefully by the editor before a decision is made.
Possible editorial decisions include:
- Accept
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Resubmit for review
- Reject
Editorial Decision
The final decision is made by the editor based on reviewer reports, editorial assessment, ethical considerations, and the scholarly quality of the manuscript. The editor may accept or reject reviewer recommendations when there is a justified editorial reason.
Authors are expected to respond carefully to reviewer comments and submit a revision letter explaining how each point has been addressed.
Appeals Procedure
Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that a serious misunderstanding, procedural error, factual mistake, or conflict of interest affected the decision.
Appeals must be submitted in writing to the editorial office and must include a clear explanation of the reason for appeal. Appeals should not merely express disagreement with reviewer opinions; they must identify specific grounds for reconsideration.
The editorial office will review the appeal and may consult the editor, editorial board members, original reviewers, or new reviewers. The decision after appeal is final.
Complaints Procedure
The journal accepts complaints related to editorial process, publication ethics, peer review conduct, conflicts of interest, corrections, delays, or published content.
Complaints should be submitted in writing and must include sufficient detail to allow proper investigation. The editorial office will acknowledge the complaint, review the matter, and respond as soon as reasonably possible.
Complaints are handled confidentially, fairly, and without retaliation.
Corrections Policy
If a published article contains an error that does not invalidate the main findings, the journal may publish a correction notice. Corrections may address factual errors, author information, affiliation details, funding statements, metadata, DOI information, or other publication details.
Corrections are linked to the original article and remain part of the permanent scholarly record.
Retractions Policy
The journal may retract an article when there is clear evidence of serious error, plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, unethical research, unreliable findings, manipulated peer review, or other major publication misconduct.
A retraction notice will explain the reason for retraction and will remain publicly available. The original article may be marked as retracted but will not normally be removed from the scholarly record unless there are legal, privacy, or safety reasons.
Expressions of Concern
If serious concerns are raised about a published article but the investigation is not yet complete, the journal may publish an expression of concern. This allows readers to be informed while the matter is being investigated.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers must provide objective, constructive, confidential, and timely evaluations. They must not use unpublished material for personal advantage. Reviewers should decline the review if they lack expertise, cannot meet the deadline, or have a conflict of interest.
Editor Responsibilities
Editors are responsible for ensuring fair review, academic quality, ethical oversight, confidentiality, and editorial independence. Editorial decisions must not be influenced by nationality, gender, religion, political views, institutional affiliation, or personal relationships.
Author Responsibilities
Authors must submit original work, follow journal guidelines, disclose conflicts of interest, identify funding sources, provide accurate references, respect ethical standards, and respond responsibly to reviewer comments.