Peer Review Policy
1. Double-Blind Peer Review
All manuscripts that pass the initial screening are referred to at least two expert reviewers. The identity of the authors is concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, to ensure an unbiased scientific evaluation.
2. Reviewer Selection
The Editorial Board carefully selects reviewers based on: their specific expertise, research experience, and independence to avoid any conflict of interest.
3. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers assess manuscripts based on: originality, scientific significance, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, quality of results, and adherence to academic writing standards.
4. Reviewer Reports
Each reviewer provides a detailed report outlining strengths, weaknesses, and a recommendation: (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject).
5. Editorial Decision
The final decision is made by the Editorial Board based on the reports. In case of conflicting reviews, a third reviewer may be invited to provide a deciding evaluation.
6. Author Notification
Authors are officially notified of the decision and provided with anonymized copies of the reviewer reports along with any required revisions.
7. Revision Review
Authors must submit a revised manuscript and a detailed response letter. The revision is reviewed to ensure all comments have been adequately addressed.
8. Review Timeline
The journal strives to complete the review process within a reasonable timeframe while maintaining high quality. Authors are informed of the estimated duration upon submission.
9. Handling Conflicting Reviews
The Editorial Board seeks an informed consensus based on evidence and scientific arguments to serve the quality of both the research and the journal.
10. Reviewer Appreciation
LJSR values the dedicated efforts and time provided by our reviewers, as their contribution is essential to maintaining scientific credibility and excellence.
