Concerning the Peer-Review Process

The University Forum Journal is committed to maintaining high standards through rigorous peer review alongside its established ethical policies. Consequently, any violations of professional codes of ethics—such as plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, and false authorship claims—directly impact the editors' decision regarding the publication of the manuscript. Furthermore, the journal adopts a double-blind peer-review system to guarantee objectivity and quality, in accordance with the following steps:

1- Initial Acceptance:

Submission Format: The manuscript must be submitted as a Word file (.docx) by one of the authors via the journal’s official email.

Required Documentation: The author must attach a signed copy of the Author Declaration/Undertaking Form, along with any other forms mandated by the journal, prior to the commencement of the peer-review process.

Acknowledgment and Eligibility: The editor will formally acknowledge receipt of the manuscript. Submissions made by anyone other than one of the co-authors will not be accepted.

Preliminary Screening: Upon receipt, the editor evaluates the manuscript to ensure compliance with the journal’s formatting template, the completeness of all structural elements, alignment with the journal’s scope, and the absence of plagiarism, in order to make an initial decision of acceptance or rejection.

 

2. Assignment to Reviewers:

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are forwarded to the review panel, which comprises:

Specialized reviewers (experts in the manuscript's field of study) from both within and outside the university. Reviewers are selected based on their published expertise and the absence of any conflict of interest with the authors. Furthermore, the identities of both the authors and reviewers are fully concealed to ensure complete objectivity.

 

3. Reviewer Evaluation:

Each reviewer evaluates the manuscript according to specific criteria, which include:

Originality: The extent to which the research enriches the existing body of knowledge.

Methodology: The soundness of the research instruments and statistical analysis (if applicable).

Results: The clarity of the findings and their alignment with the research questions.

Ethics: Proper citation practices and the complete absence of plagiarism.

Language and Style: The flow, coherence, and linguistic integrity of the text.

 

The peer-review report is completed via an electronic form that requires:

a) A Detailed Assessment: Comprehensive feedback and qualitative comments on each section of the manuscript.

b) An Editorial Recommendation: A distinct recommendation to either: Accept the manuscript / Accept with revisions / Reject.

4. Editorial Decision:

Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editor-in-Chief renders one of the following decisions:

a) Accept Without Revisions: (Occurs rarely).

b) Conditional Acceptance: Subject to making the required modifications.

c) Resubmit for Review: Requires major revisions followed by a secondary round of peer review.

d) Reject: Accompanied by a statement of reasons for the rejection.

Decisions are communicated to the corresponding author within a specified timeframe (e.g., 4–8 weeks).

5. Revision Stage:

If an author is requested to revise their manuscript, they must:

a) Submit the revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response letter detailing all changes made.

b) Adhere to the designated deadline (typically 2–4 weeks).

Depending on the nature of the revisions, the modified manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to new reviewers.

 

6. Final Acceptance and Publication:

Once the revisions are approved, the manuscript is formally accepted for publication.

The manuscript then enters the copyediting, proofreading, and final typesetting stages to align with the journal's visual identity.

The article is published in the upcoming issue and is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) to facilitate proper citation tracking.

 

7. Quality and Integrity Guarantees:

Confidentiality: The identities of both authors and reviewers remain strictly confidential throughout the process.

Efficiency: Continuous efforts are made to minimize the duration between initial submission and final publication.

Right of Appeal: Authors retain the right to appeal an editorial decision, provided they submit robust scientific justifications.

Journal Indexing: The journal’s indexing metadata in databases such as Google Scholar and Crossref is updated periodically.