Peer Review Process
At Research Beacon Journal, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and quality. To ensure this, all submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process. This process helps maintain objectivity, fairness, and scholarly excellence in the work we publish.
1. Initial Screening
Once a manuscript is submitted, it is first reviewed by the editorial team to ensure it meets the journal’s basic submission guidelines, including:
- Alignment with the journal’s scope.
- Adherence to formatting and ethical guidelines.
- A check for plagiarism and originality using plagiarism detection tools.
If the manuscript does not meet these criteria, it will be returned to the authors for revision before being sent for peer review.
2. Double-Blind Review
In a double-blind review process, both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other. This ensures impartiality and fairness during the evaluation. During the peer review, the manuscript will be evaluated on the following criteria:
- Originality: Does the manuscript contribute new knowledge or insights to the field?
- Quality of Research: Is the methodology sound, and are the results presented clearly?
- Significance: How valuable are the findings to the field of study?
- Structure and Clarity: Is the manuscript well-organized, and does it follow a logical flow?
- References: Are the references relevant, current, and appropriately cited?
3. Reviewers' Feedback
Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers will provide detailed comments and recommendations, which can include:
- Accept without Revisions: The manuscript is accepted as is.
- Minor Revisions: Some improvements are suggested, but the manuscript is fundamentally sound.
- Major Revisions: Significant changes are required before the manuscript can be reconsidered.
- Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication.
4. Decision and Revisions
After receiving feedback from the reviewers, the editorial board will make one of the following decisions:
- Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication with or without minor revisions.
- Revise and Resubmit: Authors are required to address the reviewers' comments and resubmit their revised manuscript. The revised submission may undergo further review.
- Reject: If the manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication, the authors will be notified with constructive feedback.
Authors will be given up to 30 days to revise their manuscripts. In cases of major revisions, additional time may be provided based on the extent of the changes required.
5. Final Review
Once revisions are submitted, the editorial team will conduct a final review to ensure all comments and suggestions have been addressed satisfactorily. In some cases, the manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation.
6. Publication
Upon final acceptance, the manuscript will be prepared for publication. Authors will receive proof copies to review for any final corrections before the article is published.
We strive to complete the peer review process within 4-8 weeks to ensure a timely publication while maintaining quality standards.