Peer Review Policy
Introduction
The Ma-Hasal Journal is committed to publishing high-quality research and ensuring the integrity of its academic content. To achieve this, the journal adopts a rigorous and transparent peer review process. The peer review process evaluates the originality, quality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts in accordance with the journal’s standards and focus.
1. Submission and Initial Screening
- All submitted manuscripts undergo a preliminary review by the editorial team.
- The initial screening assesses the manuscript's compliance with the journal's scope, formatting guidelines, and ethical standards.
- Manuscripts that do not meet basic criteria are returned to the authors with feedback for revision or rejection.
2. Peer Review Model
- The Ma-Hasal Journal employs a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality and confidentiality.
- Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and authors are not informed of the reviewers’ identities.
- Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field.
3. Reviewer Selection
- Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, research experience, and familiarity with the manuscript’s topic.
- Conflicts of interest are avoided by ensuring that reviewers have no prior involvement with the manuscript or the authors.
4. Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
- Originality and novelty of the research.
- Clarity of objectives and research questions.
- Methodological rigor and appropriateness.
- Relevance and significance of findings.
- Quality of data presentation and analysis.
- Adherence to ethical research standards.
- Contribution to the field of study.
5. Review Timeline
- Reviewers are typically given 2-4 weeks to complete their evaluation.
- Authors will be informed of delays, if any, in the review process.
6. Decision Categories
Based on reviewers’ recommendations, the editorial team makes one of the following decisions:
- Accepted: The manuscript is accepted for publication with minimal or no revisions.
- Minor Revisions: Authors are required to address specific comments before final acceptance.
- Major Revisions: Substantial changes are required, and the revised manuscript may undergo further review.
- Rejected: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or falls outside its scope.
7. Revisions and Resubmission
- Authors must address all reviewer comments and provide a point-by-point response document with the revised manuscript.
- Revised manuscripts must be submitted within the specified timeline, typically 2-6 weeks.
8. Ethical Considerations
- The Ma-Hasal Journal follows strict ethical guidelines to ensure the integrity of the review process.
- Plagiarism, data fabrication, or manipulation are grounds for rejection.
- Reviewers and authors must disclose any conflicts of interest.
9. Appeals and Complaints
- Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a detailed explanation and additional evidence to support their case.
- Appeals are reviewed by the editorial board, and decisions are final.
10. Reviewer Recognition
- Reviewers are acknowledged annually for their contribution to the journal’s success.
- Exceptional reviewers may receive certificates or recognition in the journal’s publications.
Conclusion
The peer review process at Ma-Hasal Journal is central to maintaining high academic standards and fostering trust among contributors, reviewers, and readers. The editorial team is dedicated to ensuring a fair, constructive, and transparent review process.
