Peer Review Process

All journals published under Ilmues Open Journals employ a double-blind peer review process to ensure fairness, objectivity, and academic rigor. In this system, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process.

Overview of the Review Workflow

All submitted manuscripts undergo a structured, multi-stage evaluation process designed to assess scholarly quality, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal’s official submission platform. Submissions must comply with the journal’s author guidelines and include all required documentation.

Initial Administrative Check

The Managing Editor conducts an initial screening to verify:

• Compliance with formatting and submission requirements
• Alignment with the journal’s scope
• Plagiarism screening
• Completeness of required documents

Initial Editorial Screening

The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript for:

• Relevance to the journal’s academic focus
• Originality, novelty, and scholarly contribution
• Basic methodological and ethical soundness

Manuscripts that do not meet minimum standards may be rejected at this stage without external peer review.

Assignment to Associate Editor

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to an Associate Editor, who oversees the peer review process and manages communication with reviewers.

Reviewer Selection

The Associate Editor selects independent experts in the relevant field based on their expertise and publication record. Typically, two to three reviewers are invited.

• Reviewers must have no conflicts of interest with the authors or the research
• Reviewer identities remain anonymous to authors
• Authors’ identities remain anonymous to reviewers

Peer Review

Reviewers are asked to provide objective and constructive evaluations focusing on:

• Scholarly validity and rigor
• Technical and methodological accuracy
• Clarity and coherence of presentation
• Reproducibility or verifiability of results (where applicable)
• Contribution to the relevant field of study

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Associate Editor makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief. Possible decisions include:

• Accept
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on all manuscripts.

Revision Stage

When revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed response to reviewers’ comments. Revised submissions may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.

Final Decision

Once revisions are deemed satisfactory, the Editor-in-Chief confirms acceptance of the manuscript for publication.

Production and Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to production, which includes copyediting, layout, proofreading, DOI assignment, and online publication.