Peer Review process

Ejthad for Scientific Research attaches utmost importance to ensuring the quality and scientific integrity of published research. To this end, the journal adopts a rigorous and transparent peer review process known as Double-Blind Peer Review. This process aims to evaluate submitted research objectively and fairly by experts specializing in the research field, ensuring the publication of valuable and original scientific contributions.
Steps of the peer review process:
1. Research submission: After receiving the research via email to the journal, the initial editorial board conducts an initial review to ensure that the research complies with the journal's scope, basic publication guidelines, and writing instructions.
2. Researcher anonymity: Any identifying information about the researcher (such as name and institutional affiliation) is removed from the research file to ensure the confidentiality and objectivity of the peer review process.
3. Research submission to reviewers: The research is submitted to at least two peer reviewers specializing in the research topic. The peer reviewers are carefully selected to ensure their expertise, competence, and independence. The researcher's identity is not disclosed to the reviewers, and likewise, the reviewers' identities are not disclosed to the researcher.
4. Research Evaluation: The reviewers read and evaluate the research based on several criteria, including:
· Originality and Innovation: The extent to which the research adds new knowledge or offers a different perspective.
· Scientific Methodology: The soundness and clarity of the methodology used.
· Depth and Analysis: The quality of the analysis and interpretation of the results.
· Clarity and Language: The soundness of the language and clarity of the presentation.
· Documentation: The accuracy and completeness of the documentation and references.
· Scientific Significance: The importance of the research and its potential impact within their field of expertise.
5. Submission of Reports and Recommendations: Each reviewer submits a detailed report on their evaluation of the research, including a clear recommendation regarding it. These may include:
· Accept the research without modifications: If the research fully meets the required criteria.
· Accept the research with minor modifications: If there are minor comments that the researcher can easily address.
· Accepting the research with substantial revisions: If there are fundamental observations that require in-depth review and modification by the researcher.
· Rejecting the research: If the research does not meet scientific standards or has fundamental, irremediable flaws.
6. Reviewing reports and making a decision: The editorial board reviews the referees' reports and recommendations and makes the final decision regarding the research. If there is a discrepancy between the referees' evaluations, the research may be sent to a third referee for final decision.
7. Notifying the researcher of the decision: The researcher is informed of the editorial board's decision and the results of the referees' evaluation (if amendments are requested, the researcher is provided with a copy of the referees' reports, anonymously).
8. Making amendments (in the event of conditional acceptance): If amendments are requested, the researcher must make the required amendments and submit a revised version of the research, accompanied by a detailed response to the referees' comments.
9. Final review: The editorial board or referees review the revised version to ensure that the observations have been addressed.
10. Final Acceptance and Publication: If all conditions and comments are met, the research is accepted for publication and undergoes final editing and formatting before inclusion in an issue of the journal.

Citation Controls:
Ejthad for Scientific Research emphasizes the need to adhere to scientific research ethics and avoid plagiarism and theft of ideas. In this context, all submitted research is subject to a thorough examination to detect any unauthorized citations. The journal adheres to a total citation percentage of less than 30% in the submitted research, emphasizing the need to properly and clearly document all sources and citations according to the approved documentation system. Research that exceeds this percentage or includes improperly documented citations will be rejected.
The rigorous peer review process and adherence to strict citation controls are the foundation of the quality and credibility of the North Africa Journal of Scientific Publishing. Through these processes, we seek to provide solid scientific contributions that serve researchers and the scientific community.