Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The Journal of Integrated Scientific Research (JISR) follows a structured peer-review process to support the quality, validity, originality, and academic relevance of published research.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment. At this stage, the editorial team evaluates whether the manuscript falls within the scope of the journal, follows the submission requirements, demonstrates adequate scholarly quality, and meets basic ethical and academic standards.

Manuscripts that are clearly outside the journal's scope, substantially incomplete, or unsuitable for further consideration may be declined during the initial screening.

Plagiarism and Ethical Screening

Manuscripts may be screened for similarity, plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, research integrity concerns, and other potential ethical issues. Authors may be requested to provide clarification or supporting documentation when necessary.

Peer Review Model

JISR follows a double-anonymous peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process, as far as reasonably practicable.

Selection of Reviewers

Manuscripts that successfully complete the initial screening are normally assigned to suitably qualified independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers should not have conflicts of interest that could compromise the objectivity of their assessment.

Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers may evaluate manuscripts on the basis of:

• Originality and scholarly contribution
• Relevance to the journal's scope
• Appropriateness of the research methodology
• Quality and clarity of data presentation
• Interpretation and discussion of results
• Adequacy and relevance of references
• Organization and clarity of the manuscript
• Ethical considerations, where applicable
• Validity of conclusions

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and academically reasoned comments that can assist authors and editors in evaluating and improving the manuscript.

Confidentiality

Submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, distribute, reproduce, or use unpublished information obtained through the peer-review process for personal advantage.

Editorial Decision

Following peer review, the editorial decision may include:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

The final editorial decision is made by the responsible editor after considering the reviewers' reports, the manuscript's scholarly quality, ethical requirements, and its suitability for the journal.

Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors should carefully address the reviewers' and editors' comments and submit a revised manuscript together with an appropriate response to the comments.

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editorial team depending on the nature and extent of the revisions.

Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any financial, institutional, professional, collaborative, or personal relationship that could reasonably influence their assessment of a manuscript. Where an appropriate independent review cannot be provided, the reviewer should decline the assignment.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, methodological quality, relevance, originality, ethical compliance, and the journal's editorial policies. Payment of publication charges, where applicable, does not guarantee acceptance of a manuscript and must not influence the peer-review decision.

Research Integrity Concerns

If reviewers or editors identify potential plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, unethical research practices, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, duplicate publication, or other serious concerns, the matter may be investigated before an editorial decision is reached.

Appeals

Authors who believe that an editorial decision resulted from a significant factual or procedural misunderstanding may submit a reasoned appeal to the editorial office. Appeals are evaluated according to the journal's editorial policies and do not automatically result in reconsideration or acceptance.

The Journal of Integrated Scientific Research is committed to maintaining a fair, confidential, independent, and academically rigorous peer-review process.