Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Process Framework
E-ISSN: 2277-7547

The International Journal of Behavioral Social and Movement Sciences (IJOBSMS) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, academic integrity, and scholarly significance of published research. The journal is committed to maintaining a fair, objective, confidential, and transparent review system for all submitted manuscripts.

Double-Blind Peer Review Process

IJOBSMS follows a double-blind peer review model in which:

  • The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers.
  • The identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.

This process helps ensure impartial evaluation and minimizes potential bias during the review process.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment to determine:

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal
  • Compliance with submission guidelines and formatting requirements
  • Adherence to ethical and publication standards
  • Similarity screening and plagiarism assessment

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s requirements may be returned to the authors or rejected before peer review.

Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening process are assigned to qualified reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Subject expertise
  • Research and publication experience
  • Academic qualifications
  • Absence of conflicts of interest
Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts on the basis of:

Originality & Contribution
Scope Relevance
Methodological Rigor
Data Quality & Analysis
Presentation Clarity
Ethical Compliance
Editorial Recommendations

Based on reviewer reports, one of the following decisions may be issued:

Accept
Accept with Minor Revisions
Major Revisions Required
Reject
Revision Process

Authors receiving reviewer comments are required to address all recommendations and submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response to reviewer observations.

Where necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation.

Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board based on reviewer reports, scholarly merit, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors are expected to maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process and must not disclose, share, or use unpublished information for personal or professional purposes.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest. Individuals with conflicts that may affect their impartiality must withdraw from the review process.

Misconduct During Peer Review

Any attempt to manipulate or compromise the peer review process constitutes serious ethical misconduct. Examples include:

  • Submission of fraudulent reviewer information
  • Fabrication of reviewer reports
  • Reviewer coercion
  • Breaches of confidentiality
  • Deliberate interference with the review process

Confirmed cases of misconduct may result in manuscript rejection and, where appropriate, notification of relevant institutions.

COPE Principles

IJOBSMS adheres to the ethical principles and best practice guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and promotes integrity, transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the peer review process.

Review Timeline

The journal aims to complete the peer review process within a reasonable timeframe. Review duration may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the responsiveness of authors during the revision process.

Estimated Timeline Framework:
Editorial Screening 3–7 Days
Peer Review 2–6 Weeks
Revision Period 1–4 Weeks
Editorial Decision 1–2 Weeks
Publication Post-Accept 3–10 Days
Peer Review Disclaimer Notice: Reviewer recommendations are advisory in nature and assist the editorial decision-making process. Responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and content of published work remains with the authors.