Peer Review Process

UGC Guidelines on Peer-Reviewed Journals

The journal employs a double-blind peer review process, where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the review process. All research articles are submitted to two anonymous subject experts for evaluation.

The journal strictly follows ethical guidelines prescribed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Every manuscript submitted for publication is initially reviewed by the Editor. If the manuscript complies with the journal’s editorial policies and meets the minimum quality standards, it is forwarded to two subject expert reviewers.

The Editor prepares a list of external academics with relevant expertise in the field and selects two reviewers from this list for the peer review process.

Reviewers are not informed of the author’s identity, as all identifying information is removed from the manuscript prior to review. Reviewers’ comments submitted to the Editor remain confidential and are anonymized before being shared with the author.

In cases where there is strong disagreement among reviewers, additional expert opinions may be sought.

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor makes the final decision regarding the acceptability of the manuscript and communicates the decision to the authors along with the reviewers’ reports.

Where revisions are required, acceptance of the manuscript is contingent upon the author’s ability to address the reviewers’ comments satisfactorily.