Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Scientific Discoveries is committed to publishing high-quality research that contributes to advancing knowledge in various scientific disciplines. To ensure the integrity and quality of the content published, the journal adheres to a thorough and unbiased peer review process. The following guidelines outline the peer review policy.

1. Double-Blind Peer Review Process
   All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a double-blind peer review process, where both the identities of the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential. This process helps to ensure that evaluations are fair, impartial, and based solely on the scientific merit of the work.

2. Reviewer Selection
   Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. The editorial board ensures that the reviewers are qualified and have the necessary knowledge and experience to provide a fair and thorough assessment. In cases of potential conflicts of interest, alternative reviewers will be selected.

3. Review Criteria
   Manuscripts are reviewed based on the following criteria:

   • Originality and novelty of the research
   • Rigor and clarity of the research methodology
   • Significance and relevance of the findings
   • Quality of writing and presentation
   • Compliance with ethical standards
   • Proper citation of sources and avoidance of plagiarism

4. Reviewer Feedback
   Reviewers are expected to provide constructive and detailed feedback to authors, highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement. Reviews should be respectful and aimed at helping authors enhance the quality of their work.

5. Review Process Timeline
   The peer review process typically takes 4-6 weeks from the date of manuscript submission. Reviewers are encouraged to complete their assessments within this timeframe, and the editorial board ensures that the review process proceeds efficiently. Authors are notified of the review outcome once the process is complete.

6. Decision-Making
   Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editorial board will make one of the following decisions:

   • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication with no or minimal revisions.
   • Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires some changes before acceptance.
   • Major Revisions: The manuscript requires substantial revisions, after which it will be reviewed again.
   • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or is deemed unsuitable for publication.

7. Confidentiality and Ethical Considerations
   Reviewers must treat the manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not share the content with others or use the information for personal or professional gain. Any ethical concerns, such as potential misconduct or plagiarism, must be reported immediately to the editorial board.

8. Appeals Process
   If authors disagree with the reviewer's decision or feedback, they may appeal to the editorial board. The editorial board will review the case and provide a final, unbiased decision. The decision made by the editorial board will be final.

9. Transparency and Accountability
   The journal maintains a commitment to transparency in the peer review process. Reviewers and authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, and the journal will ensure that the process is fair, rigorous, and free from bias.