Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Innovation in Multidisciplinary Research and Technology (JIMRT) is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic quality, integrity, and impartiality in the publication process. Our peer review policy is designed to ensure that all published research is rigorously evaluated, credible, and contributes meaningfully to multidisciplinary scholarship. JIMRT employs a double-blind peer review process to maintain fairness and objectivity in the evaluation of all submissions.

1. Overview of the Double-Blind Peer Review Process

In the double-blind peer review process, the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed to eliminate bias and ensure impartial evaluation. This approach fosters objective assessment based solely on the quality and merit of the manuscript. The process is managed by the JIMRT editorial team to ensure transparency, efficiency, and adherence to ethical standards.

2. Key Principles of Peer Review

• Fairness: The double-blind process ensures that manuscripts are evaluated based on their academic merit, free from bias related to the authors’ identity, affiliations, or reputation.
• Confidentiality: All manuscripts and reviewer feedback are treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share or use manuscript content for personal purposes.
• Objectivity: Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, unbiased feedback focused on the manuscript’s originality, methodology, clarity, and contribution to the field.
• Timeliness: JIMRT aims to complete the initial review process within 4–6 weeks, ensuring efficient communication with authors.
• Ethical Standards: The peer review process adheres to international ethical guidelines for academic publishing, ensuring integrity and transparency.

3. Peer Review Process

3.1 Initial Submission Screening

• Upon submission via the Submission Portal, manuscripts are screened by the editorial office to ensure compliance with JIMRT’s scope, formatting requirements, and ethical guidelines.
• Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements (e.g., incomplete submissions, plagiarism, or misalignment with the journal’s scope) may be desk-rejected with feedback provided to the authors.

3.2 Assignment of Reviewers

• Suitable manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field(s). Reviewers are selected based on their qualifications, experience, and absence of conflicts of interest.
• To maintain the double-blind process, all identifying information is removed from the manuscript before it is sent to reviewers, and reviewer identities are withheld from authors.

3.3 Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Originality: Does the manuscript present novel findings or perspectives?
• Methodological Rigor: Are the research methods sound, reproducible, and appropriately applied?
• Clarity and Presentation: Is the manuscript well-written, logically organized, and accessible to a multidisciplinary audience?
• Relevance and Impact: Does the work contribute significantly to the field and align with JIMRT’s multidisciplinary scope?
• Ethical Compliance: Does the manuscript adhere to ethical standards, including proper citation, data integrity, and research ethics?

Reviewers provide detailed, constructive feedback and recommend one of the following:

• Accept without revisions
• Accept with minor revisions
• Revise and resubmit (major revisions required)
• Reject

3.4 Editorial Decision

• The editorial team reviews the feedback from all reviewers and makes a final decision based on their recommendations.
• Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments along with the editorial decision. If revisions are required, authors are given clear guidance and a timeline for resubmission.
• Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of review, depending on the extent of changes required.

3.5 Final Acceptance

• Once a manuscript meets JIMRT’s standards, it is accepted for publication. Authors are notified, and the manuscript proceeds to the production stage for copyediting, formatting, and publication in JIMRT’s open-access format.

4. Reviewer Responsibilities

• Expertise: Reviewers should only accept assignments within their area of expertise to ensure accurate and informed evaluations.
• Impartiality: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest (e.g., professional or personal relationships with authors) and recuse themselves if necessary.
• Constructive Feedback: Comments should be specific, professional, and aimed at improving the manuscript’s quality.
• Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the agreed timeline (typically 2–3 weeks) to support efficient publication.

5. Author Responsibilities

• Anonymization: Authors must remove all identifying information from the manuscript to ensure the integrity of the double-blind process.
• Response to Feedback: Authors are expected to address reviewer comments thoroughly and professionally, providing a detailed response to each point raised.
• Ethical Compliance: Authors must adhere to JIMRT’s ethical guidelines, including originality, proper citation, and transparency in data and methodology.

6. Editorial Oversight

The JIMRT editorial board oversees the peer review process to ensure consistency, fairness, and adherence to ethical standards. Editors may intervene in cases of conflicting reviewer recommendations, ethical concerns, or disputes, ensuring decisions are made in the best interest of academic integrity.

7. Ethical Considerations

• Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors must not disclose or use manuscript content for personal gain or share it with unauthorized individuals.
• Plagiarism and Misconduct: Any concerns about plagiarism, data fabrication, or other ethical breaches will be investigated thoroughly, and appropriate actions (e.g., rejection, retraction) will be taken.
• Appeals: Authors may appeal editorial decisions by contacting the editorial office at editor@jimrt.org with a detailed justification. Appeals are reviewed by an independent editorial board member.

8. Transparency and Open Access

As an open-access journal, JIMRT ensures that all published articles are freely accessible to a global audience. The double-blind peer review process supports the credibility and quality of published work, enhancing its impact and visibility.

9. Becoming a Reviewer

JIMRT welcomes qualified researchers and academics to join our reviewer pool. If you are interested in contributing your expertise, please contact us at contact@edtechpublishers.com with your CV and areas of specialization.

10. Contact Us

For questions about the peer review process, submission guidelines, or editorial policies, please contact our editorial office: 

Email: editor@jimrt.org 

Submission Portal: https://jimrt.org/paper-submission/

JIMRT: Ensuring Academic Excellence Through Rigorous and Fair Peer Review