Peer Review Policy
Peer Review Policy
Faculty of Arts Journal – University of Misurata
This document has been prepared based on best practices adopted by peer-reviewed academic journals and various open-access sources, with adaptation and rewording to suit the specific context of the Faculty of Arts Journal – University of Misurata.
- Purpose of Peer Review
Assessing the originality, relevance, and scientific accuracy of submissions.
Providing constructive feedback to improve the quality of manuscripts.
Ensuring alignment with the journal’s standards and the expectations of the academic community.
The Peer Review Process
- Initial Assessment: The editorial team conducts a preliminary evaluation for scope and compliance. Non-compliant manuscripts may be rejected at this stage.
- Reviewer Selection: Two to three qualified reviewers are selected based on subject-matter expertise.
- Reviewer Invitation: Reviewers are invited and asked to declare any conflicts of interest and confirm their availability to meet the review deadline.
- Conducting the Review: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:
- Originality and significance of the research
- Clarity and rigor of methodology
- Reliability of data and results
- Coherence and relevance of discussion and conclusions
- Quality of writing and adherence to submission guidelines - Reviewer Reports: Reviewers submit detailed, constructive reports and recommend one of the following:
- Acceptance without revision
- Acceptance with minor revisions
- Acceptance with major revisions
- Rejection - Editorial Decision: The editorial board makes the final decision based on reviewer reports. Authors are notified of the decision and provided with reviewer feedback.
- Revision and Resubmission: If revisions are required, authors may resubmit their revised manuscript, which may be subjected to further review.
- Final Acceptance: Manuscripts that fulfill all editorial and scientific requirements are formally accepted for publication.
- Confidentiality and Anonymity
The journal follows a double-blind review process. The identities of both reviewers and authors remain confidential. Reviewers must treat all manuscript content as confidential and refrain from using it for personal gain.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Provide objective, fair, and constructive evaluations.
Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.
Respect the confidentiality of the manuscript.
Disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
Decline to review if any relationship may compromise impartiality.
- Appeals and Complaints
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a written request stating their reasons. The editorial board will review the appeal and issue a final decision. Complaints regarding the peer review process may be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief for investigation.
