Peer Review Process

Shodhshauryam: International Scientific Refereed Research Journal (SHISRRJ) follows a rigorous, transparent, and unbiased peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published content.

The journal adheres to internationally accepted standards of scholarly peer review and editorial decision-making.

Type of Peer Review

SHISRRJ operates a double-blind peer review system, in which:

  • The identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers

  • The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors

This approach ensures impartial evaluation and minimizes bias.

Review Workflow

The peer-review process consists of the following stages:

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the manuscript is reviewed by the Editorial Office to verify:

  • Scope alignment with the journal

  • Compliance with submission guidelines

  • Completeness of manuscript files

  • Ethical declarations and plagiarism screening

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to authors or rejected without external review.

2. Assignment to Handling Editor

Manuscripts passing initial screening are assigned to a Handling Editor with subject expertise, who oversees the peer-review process.

3. External Peer Review

  • Each manuscript is evaluated by a minimum of two independent reviewers

  • Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, research experience, and publication record

  • Reviewers assess manuscripts on:

    • Originality and significance

    • Methodological rigor

    • Clarity and organization

    • Ethical compliance

    • Relevance to the field

4. Review Reports and Recommendations

Reviewers submit detailed reports with one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept without revision

  • Minor revision

  • Major revision

  • Reject

5. Editorial Decision

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editor based on:

  • Reviewer reports

  • Scientific merit

  • Journal policies

Authors are provided with anonymized reviewer comments to support revision and improvement.

6. Revision and Re-Review

  • Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation

  • Authors must provide a point-by-point response to reviewer comments

Timeframe

SHISRRJ aims to complete the peer-review process within a reasonable and transparent timeframe, depending on reviewer availability and the extent of revisions required. The journal does not guarantee acceptance or expedited publication.

Reviewer Ethics and Confidentiality

All reviewers are required to:

  • Treat manuscripts as confidential documents

  • Declare conflicts of interest

  • Review objectively and constructively

  • Avoid using unpublished material for personal advantage

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based solely on:

  • Academic merit

  • Scientific validity

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

Decisions are independent of commercial considerations, author nationality, institutional affiliation, or funding sources.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a formal appeal against editorial decisions by providing:

  • Clear justification

  • Scientific arguments addressing reviewer concerns

Appeals are reviewed by senior editorial members, and the decision following review is final.