First Half of 2026 Report

Faculty of Arts Journal – Misurata University

Editorial Metrics

(Issue 21 January–June 2026)

(Published in August 2026)

In line with its commitment to academic transparency, editorial quality, and continuous improvement, the Faculty of Arts Journal publishes a semiannual report highlighting key indicators of manuscript submissions, editorial decisions, peer review, and processing times.

1. Manuscript Status Overview

Table 1

Submission and Editorial Processing Statistics

Indicator	Number	Percentage
Total manuscripts received during the reporting period	60	81%
Manuscripts carried over from the previous reporting period	14	19%
Total manuscripts processed during the reporting period	74	100%
Manuscripts accepted and published	23	31%
Manuscripts rejected	40	54%
— Rejected at the initial screening (without peer review)	34	—
— Rejected after peer review	6	15% of manuscripts sent for peer review
Manuscripts under processing at the end of the reporting period	11	—
Average number of days to first editorial decision	13 days	—
Average number of days to acceptance and publication	47 days	—

·     Key observations

The data indicate sustained editorial activity during the reporting period, with the Editorial Board processing both newly submitted manuscripts and manuscripts carried over from the previous period. Most manuscripts reached a final outcome through acceptance and publication or rejection, while a limited number remained under processing at the end of June 2026.

The distribution of editorial decisions also highlights the role of initial screening as an important stage of the journal's quality-control process. A substantial proportion of rejected manuscripts were identified and declined before being sent for external peer review. This reflects the journal's practice of assessing manuscripts at an early stage for academic and methodological standards, originality, relevance to the journal's scope, and compliance with submission requirements.

2. Publication and Institutional and Geographical Openness

Table 2

Publication Statistics and Institutional and Geographical Openness

Indicator	Number	Percentage
Total published articles	23	—
Articles from outside the university	12	52.17
Articles from outside Libya	1	4.35
Number of authors	34	—
Number of institutions represented by the authors	11	—
Authors from outside Misurata University	18	52.94
Authors from outside Libya	2	5.88

·      Key Observations

The publication indicators show that the journal's contributor base extends beyond Misurata University, with contributions involving researchers affiliated with a range of academic institutions. This indicates a clear level of institutional openness at the national level and a degree of diversity in the institutional sources represented in the journal's published output.

At the international level, however, participation from outside Libya remains limited during the reporting period. Expanding the journal's contributor base to include a wider range of researchers and academic institutions from outside Libya therefore represents an area for further development, particularly as the journal seeks to strengthen its regional and international academic visibility.

Overall, the publication data indicate clear national institutional openness, while the international dimension remains an area for continued development.

3. Editorial Processing Time

The processing-time indicators suggest a relatively efficient editorial workflow. An average of 13 days to the first editorial decision indicates that manuscripts are subject to initial assessment without prolonged waiting at the beginning of the editorial process.

The average period from manuscript submission to acceptance and publication was 47 days. This indicates that manuscripts meeting the journal's requirements generally move through the screening, peer-review, revision, and publication stages within a relatively short period.

The difference between the average time to rejection, at 27 days, and the average time to acceptance and publication, at 47 days, is consistent with the different requirements associated with these outcomes. Rejection, particularly at the initial screening stage, may be reached without completing the full peer-review and revision process, whereas acceptance generally requires the completion of these stages.

The relationship between initial screening and post-peer-review decisions is also noteworthy. Only a limited number of manuscripts were rejected after peer review, representing 15% of manuscripts sent for peer review. This pattern is partly associated with the journal's practice of conducting an initial editorial assessment before external review. Screening manuscripts against the journal's basic academic and editorial requirements allows the peer-review process to focus primarily on submissions that have already passed an initial quality assessment.

Accordingly, the relatively high proportion of initial-screening rejections and the lower proportion of rejections following peer review should be viewed as related outcomes of the journal's editorial quality-control process rather than as separate indicators.

4. Peer-Review Policy

The Faculty of Arts Journal applies a Double-Anonymous Peer Review system. An initial editorial screening is conducted before peer review, and manuscripts are normally sent to external reviewers only after meeting the journal's basic academic, methodological, and editorial requirements.

Additional rounds of peer review may be conducted when substantial revisions are required. Final editorial decisions are based on the reviewers' assessments, the quality of the revised manuscript, and the academic and editorial standards adopted by the journal.

5. Editorial Transparency

The publication of these semi-annual indicators forms part of the journal's commitment to transparency and accountability. The reported indicators provide authors, reviewers, readers, and the wider academic community with a concise overview of the journal's editorial activity and the performance of its manuscript-processing workflow.

The journal will continue to monitor these indicators and publish updated data on a semi-annual basis. This approach is intended to support the systematic monitoring of editorial performance, identify areas for further improvement, and enhance transparency in the journal's editorial practices.