Peer review policy

The Ejthad for Scientific Research considers a rigorous and objective peer review process to be the cornerstone of ensuring the quality and scientific integrity of published research. Therefore, the journal adopts the Double-Blind Peer Review policy as the primary mechanism for evaluating all research submitted for publication.

Principles of the Journal's Peer Review Policy:

1. Double-Blind Peer Review: All research that meets the initial criteria for publication is sent to at least two referees specialized in the research topic. The identity of the author(s) is not disclosed to the referees, and likewise, the identity of the referees is not disclosed to the author(s). This double confidentiality aims to ensure an objective and unbiased evaluation of research based solely on its scientific quality.

2. Selection of Reviewers: The Editorial Board selects the reviewers with utmost care, taking into account their experience, specific specialization, and scientific standing in the relevant field of research. The Board seeks to select independent and impartial reviewers.

3. Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers are provided with a clear evaluation form that includes specific criteria for evaluating research. These criteria include:

• Originality and Innovation

• Scientific Significance and Knowledge Contribution

• Integrity of the Methodology Used

• Clarity of Presentation and Logical Organization

• Accuracy of Analysis and Discussion

• Integrity of Language and Scientific Style

• Quality of Documentation and References

• Conformity to the Journal's Scope

4. Reviewers' Report: Reviewers submit a detailed report on their evaluation of the research, including strengths and weaknesses, observations, and clear recommendations regarding the possibility of publication (accept, accept with minor modifications, accept with substantial modifications, reject).

5. Editorial Decision: The editorial board makes the final decision regarding the publication of the research based on the reviewers' reports and recommendations. The board may request additional revisions from the reviewers or consult a third reviewer if there is a significant discrepancy in the evaluations.

6. Author Notification: Authors are informed of the editorial board's decision and the results of the reviewers' evaluation (with anonymity) and are provided with a copy of the review reports if they request amendments.

7. Review of Revisions: If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised version of the manuscript along with a detailed response to the reviewers' comments. The editorial board or reviewers will review the revised version to ensure that the requested comments are met.

8. Review Timeline: The journal seeks to expedite the review process as quickly as possible while maintaining its quality. Authors will be informed of the expected review timeline upon submission of the manuscript.

9. Dealing with Disagreeing Opinions: If there are differing opinions among reviewers, the editorial board seeks to achieve consensus or make an informed decision based on the arguments and evidence presented.

10. Appreciating Reviewers' Efforts: Ejthad for  Scientific Research appreciates the efforts and valuable time of reviewers who devote to evaluating research. Their contribution is essential to maintaining the quality of its publications.

The journal adheres to this strict peer review policy to ensure the publication of high-quality research that contributes to the advancement of knowledge and meets the expectations of the scientific community.