Peer review processes, policies, and obligations

1.The following types of contributions submitted to Afaq Journal are peer-reviewed: scientific research, scholarly articles, and editorial-generalized issues addressed by specialists in the humanities and applied sciences.

2.A robust and effective peer-review process supports the advancement of research and scientific discovery by ensuring the strength and reliability of research findings. Therefore, Afaq Journal always takes great care in selecting its reviewers.

3.We ask reviewers to submit their reports via the journal's secure online Open Journal System (OJS) account and website, following the link provided in the editor's email. An online help guide is available to assist with using this system, and you are welcome to email the journal's primary contact address for any technical issues.

4.Reviewer selection is crucial to the publication process and is based on several factors, including experience, reputation, specific recommendations, and our prior experience with reviewer characteristics. For example, we select reviewers who are prompt, offer constructive criticism, and prioritize the public interest over their personal opinions, regardless of whether they are highly critical or lenient. Potential reviewers are contacted before submitting research papers for evaluation.

5.Peer reviewers must be aware that these papers and articles contain confidential information, which must be treated as such.

6.The journal is committed to diversity, fairness, and inclusivity in the selection of peer reviewers.

7.The journal strives for diverse demographic representation among its peer reviewers.

8.The review report is written by the reviewers. The primary purpose of the review is to provide the editors with the information necessary to reach a decision, but the review should also guide authors on how to strengthen their paper to a point where it might be acceptable. Whenever possible, a negative review should explain the main weaknesses of the research or article to the authors so that rejected authors understand the basis of the decision and can see what needs to be done to improve the research or article for publication elsewhere.

9.The journal provides reviewers with a form containing criteria for the research paper, enabling them to provide an appropriate evaluation of the various scientific and technical aspects of the submitted research or article.

10.The reviewer evaluation process must be accurately, neatly, and systematically documented. When issuing their final recommendation for a research paper, peer reviewers must choose one of the following options:

-Accept the paper as is: The paper is ready for publication without modification.

-The paper is suitable but requires revisions: The paper needs minor revisions that the editor can review and accept.

-Reject the paper: The paper is too weak and cannot be accepted for publication in its current form.