IGJAMS
Peer Review Process
Transparent • Fair • Confidential • Double-Blind
IGJAMS follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, academic integrity, and scientific contribution of all manuscripts. The identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process.
Double Blind
Authors and reviewers remain anonymous
Confidential
Strict confidentiality is maintained
Fair Evaluation
Assessed on academic merit only
Editorial Independence
Decisions made without any external influence
Explore This Section
Double-Blind Peer Review
Overview of IGJAMS double-blind review system and its principles.
Double-Blind Review Chart
Visual flowchart of the complete peer review process step by step.
Average Review Timeline
Indicative timelines for each stage of the review process.
Reviewer Guidelines
Essential guidelines for conducting high-quality peer reviews.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Key responsibilities expected from every reviewer at IGJAMS.
Reviewer Code of Conduct
Code of conduct and ethical standards for all reviewers.
Reviewer Selection Policy
How reviewers are selected and managed at IGJAMS.
Reviewer Confidentiality Policy
Confidentiality rules and data protection for reviewers.
Editorial Decision Process
How editorial decisions are made at IGJAMS.
Appeals Process
Process for authors to appeal editorial decisions.
Reviewer FAQs
Frequently asked questions for peer reviewers at IGJAMS.