Peer Review Process

JUMAD employs a double-blind peer-review process. This means that both the reviewer's and the author's identities are concealed from each other throughout the review process to ensure impartiality.

The review process is as follows:

  1. Initial Screening: The editorial office first screens each manuscript to ensure it adheres to the journal's submission guidelines, including scope, structure, language, and the template requirement. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without review.
  2. Peer Review: The manuscript is sent to at least two independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.
  3. Reviewer's Report: Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript's originality, methodology, contribution to the literature, and clarity of presentation. They will provide a recommendation: (a) Accept Submission, (b) Revisions Required, (c) Resubmit for Review, or (d) Decline Submission.
  4. Editorial Decision: The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on the reviewers' recommendations and their own assessment.
  5. Revision Stage: If revisions are required, the author is given time to revise the manuscript based on the reviewers' comments. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the reviewers for a second round of evaluation.
  6. Final Decision: The final decision of acceptance or rejection is sent to the corresponding author.