Peer Review Policy
Research Mosaic (RM) employs a double-blind peer review process for all submitted manuscripts, meaning that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other throughout the review process. A more in-depth description of RM peer review policy is provided below:
Submission of Paper
The corresponding author can submit research work for potential publication in Research Mosaic (RM) via the Online Journal System (OJS).
Editorial Office Assessment
The RM editorial office checks the submitted manuscripts' format and composition in line with the author's guidelines and the journal's scope. This stage of scrutiny does not assess the quality of research.
Chief Editor’s Appraisal
The chief editor apprises whether research work is original, has potential of novelty, and is appropriately aligned with the journal’s scope. If the manuscript does fulfill the aforementioned criteria, it is liable to rejection at this stage without being considered for any further review.
Chief Editor’s Assignment to an Associate Editor
After appraising the manuscript, the chief editor assigns the task of further appraisal to associate editors through desk review/editing.
Desk Review
The associate editor scrutinizes the manuscript in light of the journal's scope and content requirements and recommends potential improvements and incorporation into the manuscript.
Communicating Suggestions to Authors
The associate editor's desk review suggestions for potential revisions and improvements of the manuscript are shared with authors for incorporation. After these necessary incorporations, the manuscript is forwarded to the experts’ review phase.
Invitation to Reviewers
The associate editor invites potential reviewers within specialized fields for manuscript review. The manuscript is then sent out to the reviewers based on their responses, with a request to complete the review within a maximum of 2 to 4 weeks. As per the journal’s policy, the manuscript is sent to two reviewers (two national).
Review Conducted
The potential and expert reviewers spare ample time to read the manuscript, reflected in how they highlight both strengths and weaknesses of the research work. If they find major issues in the manuscript, reviewers have the freedom either to completely reject it or suggest major revisions. The reviewers submit their reviews to the journal’s editorial team with recommendations to accept (with/without minor or major revisions) or reject.
Journal Evaluates the Reviews
The journal’s editorial team considers and scrutinizes all the reviewers’ comments and decisions before reaching a final decision. In case of wider differences in reviewers’ comments, the editor might invite an additional reviewer (if deemed appropriate) to get further opinions before making the final decision.
Decision Communication
The editor communicates the decision with authors via email containing relevant reviewer’s comments and advises the authors to incorporate all the changes as per the reviewers’ suggestions.
Final Decision
The editorial team will look through the resubmitted manuscript to ensure that the author(s) have revised the manuscript in response to the reviewers’ comments. At this final decision stage, the author(s) may be required to make further revisions, or the manuscript might be rejected if the author(s) did not adequately carry out the revisions suggested by the reviewers.
Copyediting, Layout Editing, and Proofreading Stage
Once the manuscript is accepted by the editorial team, it will undergo copyediting, layout editing, and proofreading processes to ensure the linguistic quality of the manuscript. After the editing stage is finished, authors are requested to double-check the PDF file of the final version before online publication.
Appeals against Editorial Decisions
In case an author would like to challenge an editorial decision, he or she should contact the Editor-In-Chief of the journal. Upon receipt of the appeal, the Editor-In-Chief will review the manuscript and peer reviewers' comments, and then make a decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. If necessary, the Editor-In-Chief may choose to send the manuscript to new referees for peer review. The decision of the Editor-In-Chief is final in such cases. All submitted complaints will be acknowledged within two working days.
