Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Science, Strategic Management, and Technology (IJSMT) is committed to publishing only the highest caliber of scholarly work. Our rigorous peer review process is the bedrock of our journal’s quality, integrity, and credibility. We adhere strictly to ethical guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Review Model: Double-Blind Peer Review

IJSMT operates a double-blind peer review system. This model is designed to ensure maximum objectivity and prevent potential bias in the evaluation process.

• To the Reviewer: The identities of the authors (names, affiliations, and contact information) are concealed from the reviewers throughout the review process.

• To the Author: The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.

This anonymity ensures that manuscripts are judged solely on the merit of their scientific content, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

2. The Review Process Flow

The journey of a manuscript through the IJSMT peer review process follows these steps:

1. Initial Editorial Assessment (Screening): The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) or an assigned Associate Editor first screens the submission to check for:

   • Adherence to the journal’s Author Guidelines (formatting, style, word count).

   • Suitability within the journal’s interdisciplinary scope.

   • Compliance with ethical standards and our plagiarism policy. Manuscripts failing this initial screen may be desk-rejected promptly.

2. Assignment and Invitation: If the manuscript passes screening, the Editor selects at least two independent expert reviewers based on their demonstrated expertise in the paper’s subject matter.

3. Review Execution: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript against specific criteria (listed below) and return their detailed comments and recommendations to the Editor. The typical review timeline is 3–6 days.

4. Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers’ feedback, the EIC makes a final decision: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

5. Revision and Re-submission: For manuscripts requiring revision, authors must address all reviewer comments comprehensively, detail their changes in a response letter, and submit the revised manuscript for re-evaluation.

3. Evaluation Criteria for Reviewers

Reviewers are asked to provide constructive feedback and assess the manuscript based on the following critical elements:

• Originality and Novelty: Does the work present new data, concepts, methodologies, or a unique interdisciplinary perspective?

• Methodological Rigor: Are the research design, data collection, and analytical methods appropriate, valid, and clearly described?

• Scholarly Contribution: Does the research significantly advance the existing knowledge base in the field of Science, Management, or Technology?

• Clarity and Structure: Is the manuscript well-written, logically structured, and easy to understand? Are the figures and tables clear and necessary?

• Ethical Compliance: Does the research adhere to appropriate ethical standards (e.g., proper citations, declared conflicts of interest)?

4. Responsibilities of Key Participants

5. Confidentiality and Ethical Integrity

All manuscripts submitted to IJSMT are treated as confidential documents.

• Reviewers must not discuss the content of a manuscript with others or use information from an unpublished manuscript to advance their own or others’ work.

• Any breach of confidentiality, plagiarism, data fabrication, or ethical misconduct identified during the review process will be thoroughly investigated according to COPE protocols, potentially resulting in the rejection of the manuscript and reporting to the authors’ institutions.

We thank all authors for entrusting their work to IJSMT and our entire community of reviewers and editors for maintaining the integrity of scholarly communication.

Updated on 10th October, 2025 at 12:50 PM.

For questions regarding the peer review process, contact the Editorial Office at editor@ijsmt.org.