Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

The Multidisciplinary Journal of Instruction (MDJI) is committed to maintaining a rigorous, fair, transparent, and confidential peer-review process. All submitted manuscripts are evaluated according to their academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, and contribution to the field.

1. Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review helps the journal:

  • Assess the academic quality and originality of manuscripts.
  • Identify methodological and scholarly weaknesses.
  • Improve the clarity and quality of submitted work.
  • Ensure that published research meets appropriate academic standards.
  • Support informed and consistent editorial decisions.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment to determine whether it:

  • Falls within the scope of MDJI.
  • Meets the journal's basic submission requirements.
  • Contains sufficient academic and scholarly content.
  • Follows the required manuscript format.
  • Raises any obvious ethical or publication concerns.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to authors or rejected before external peer review.

3. Peer-Review Model

MDJI generally follows a Double-Blind Peer Review process.

Under this model:

  • The reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
  • The authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
  • Manuscripts should therefore be prepared without unnecessary identifying information.

The journal may use another review arrangement when appropriate and will communicate the applicable process to authors and reviewers.

4. Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected according to their:

  • Subject expertise.
  • Academic qualifications and research experience.
  • Knowledge of the manuscript's topic.
  • Ability to provide an objective assessment.
  • Availability to complete the review within the required timeframe.

The journal seeks to avoid assigning reviewers who have conflicts of interest with the authors or the submitted research.

5. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively and constructively.
  • Assess the originality, relevance, methodology, analysis, and presentation of the research.
  • Identify significant weaknesses or ethical concerns.
  • Provide clear and useful comments for authors.
  • Maintain strict confidentiality.
  • Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.
  • Declare any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest.
  • Avoid using unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers should not make personal, discriminatory, offensive, or inappropriate comments about authors.

6. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers may consider the following aspects:

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge.
  • Relevance to the scope of MDJI.
  • Clarity of research objectives or questions.
  • Adequacy of the literature review.
  • Appropriateness of research methodology.
  • Quality and reliability of analysis.
  • Accuracy and clarity of results.
  • Discussion and interpretation.
  • Organization and presentation.
  • Appropriate use of references.
  • Ethical compliance.
  • Overall academic significance.

7. Editorial Decisions

Following peer review, the editor may make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Revise and Resubmit
  • Reject

The final editorial decision is made by the responsible editor based on the manuscript, reviewer comments, journal policies, and overall academic assessment.

8. Revisions

When revisions are requested, authors should address reviewer and editorial comments carefully and provide a clear response explaining how each significant concern has been addressed.

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editor, depending on the nature of the revisions.

9. Conflicting Reviewer Recommendations

If reviewers provide substantially different recommendations, the editor may:

  • Request clarification from the reviewers.
  • Obtain an additional independent review.
  • Conduct further editorial assessment.
  • Make a decision based on the available evidence and journal policies.

The journal does not automatically accept or reject a manuscript solely on the basis of the numerical recommendation of one reviewer.

10. Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for review are confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose manuscript content, review reports, or editorial discussions to unauthorized individuals.

Confidential information must not be used for personal, academic, financial, or professional benefit.

11. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose conflicts of interest that could affect the impartiality of the review or editorial decision.

Potential conflicts may include:

  • Recent collaboration with the authors.
  • Personal or professional relationships.
  • Financial interests.
  • Direct competition in closely related research.
  • Institutional relationships that may affect impartiality.

Where necessary, another reviewer or editor will be assigned.

12. Plagiarism and Research Misconduct

If reviewers identify possible plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, unethical research practices, or other serious concerns, they should notify the editor with supporting information.

The journal may investigate such concerns according to its publication ethics procedures.

13. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe there has been a significant procedural error, factual misunderstanding, or other substantive issue affecting the decision.

Appeals should provide specific evidence or reasoning. Appeals will be reviewed fairly and, where appropriate, by an editor who was not directly responsible for the original decision.

14. Review Timeline

MDJI aims to process manuscripts efficiently while allowing sufficient time for appropriate academic evaluation. Review timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, revision requirements, and the volume of submissions.

15. Reviewer Recognition

Where appropriate and consistent with confidentiality requirements, MDJI may acknowledge the contribution of reviewers through suitable recognition mechanisms.

Reviewer identities will remain confidential where the journal's double-blind review policy applies.

16. Commitment to Fair Review

The Multidisciplinary Journal of Instruction (MDJI) is committed to a peer-review system based on academic integrity, confidentiality, objectivity, fairness, transparency, and scholarly quality.

The journal does not discriminate against authors on the basis of nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, personal characteristics, or other irrelevant considerations. Editorial and peer-review decisions are based on the scholarly merits of the submitted work.