Peer-review & Publication Policy

Peer Review Process

International Journal of Trends in Multidisciplinary employs a Double-Blind Peer Review process. This means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other throughout the review process to ensure an objective, data-driven evaluation of the research. Our mission is to ensure that every published article meets the highest standards of scientific rigor, free from personal, institutional or geographic bias.

• Initial Screening: All submitted manuscripts are first reviewed by the Editorial Office for basic technical requirements and alignment with the journal’s scope.
• Review Assignment: Manuscripts that pass initial screening are sent to at least two independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.
• Decision: Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision or Reject.

Responsibilities

1. Author Responsibilities & Submission Standards
Authors are the primary stakeholders in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. By submitting to the journal, authors commit to the following ethical and technical mandates:

i). Ethical Obligations & Authorship

• Originality: Authors must ensure the manuscript is original, has not been published elsewhere in any language and is not under consideration by another journal.
• Authorship Criteria: All persons who made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, data analysis or interpretation must be included as co-authors.
• Conflict of Interest: Authors are required to disclose any financial or personal relationships that could be construed to influence the results or interpretation.
• Funding: All sources of financial support must be clearly acknowledged.

ii). Integrity of the Double-Blind Process
To ensure an objective, data-driven evaluation, authors must:

• Anonymize the Manuscript: Remove all names, affiliations and acknowledgments from the main manuscript file.
• Neutralize Self-Citations: Avoid identifying phrases such as "As we demonstrated in our 2022 study"; instead, use neutral citations.
• Separate Title Page: Submit a separate document containing author names, ORCID IDs, affiliations and funding disclosures to be kept from reviewers.
• AI Disclosure: Declare the use of Generative AI tools in the "Methods" or "Acknowledgments" section; AI cannot be listed as an author.

iii). Post-Submission & Publication Duties

• Citations: Manuscripts must be presented according to journal requirements and include proper citations for all previous work in the field.
• Data Availability: Authors must be prepared to provide raw data if requested by editors during the review process.
• Error Reporting: If significant errors are discovered after publication, authors are obligated to promptly notify the editor to facilitate a formal correction or retraction.
• Review Expectations: Authors can typically expect to receive reviewer reports within three weeks.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities & Ethical Mandates
Reviewers serve as the primary gatekeepers of scientific integrity, providing the critical evaluation necessary for effective editorial decisions. By accepting an invitation, reviewers commit to the following professional standards:

i). Ethical Conduct & Integrity

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat manuscripts as privileged, confidential documents; they may not be shared, copied or discussed with third parties without authorization from the Editor-in-Chief.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must recuse themselves if they have any competitive, collaborative or personal connections with the authors or if they recognize the work despite anonymization.
• Prohibition of AI: To protect author confidentiality, reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading manuscripts into AI tools for summary or critique generation.
• Competence & Timeliness: Reviewers must immediately notify the editor if they feel unqualified to evaluate the research or cannot meet the review deadline.

ii). Technical Evaluation & Misconduct Detection

• Scientific Rigor: Reviewers must assess the intellectual content for quality and identify relevant published work that the authors have failed to cite.
• Misconduct Identification: Reviewers are tasked with identifying potential data fabrication, image manipulation, plagiarism or "Paper Mill" characteristics.
• Reporting: Any similarities to previously published works or suspected ethical breaches must be reported to the editorial board.

iii). Accountability
The journal maintains a zero-tolerance policy for reviewer misconduct. Prompt action will be taken against reviewers in cases involving a breach of confidentiality, intentional delays in the peer-review process, undisclosed conflicts of interest or plagiarism.

3. Editorial Responsibilities & Decision Hierarchy
The Editorial Board serves as the final arbiter of all content, ensuring a fair and rigorous evaluation of research.

i). Duties of Editors
Editors are liable for evaluating the suitability of manuscripts based on quality, alignment with the journal’s Aims and Scope and originality. Intellectual merit is assessed without regard to the authors' race, gender, origin, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. To protect the integrity of the process, editors maintain strict confidentiality and will not disclose manuscript information to anyone outside the author, reviewers and editorial board.

ii). The Editorial Process & Decision Tiers
All manuscripts undergo a structured review process:

• Initial Desk Review: The Editor-in-Chief screens for scope fit, adherence to anonymization and plagiarism via Turnitin.
• External Review: Manuscripts are evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts.
• Editorial Adjudication: : The Handling Editor reviews all reports to issue a final decision:
  • Accept The manuscript is ready for production.
  • Minor Revision Small technical changes are required, typically verified by the editor
  • Major Revision Significant flaws require extensive changes and a second round of external review.
  • Reject The work is fundamentally flawed or outside the journal's scope.

4. Publisher Responsibilities
The publisher provides the foundational support and administrative oversight required to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record. The publisher’s responsibilities include:
i). Ethical Oversight and Collaborative Integrity

• Standards Compliance: The publisher ensures that the journal adheres to the Core Practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and ICMJE recommendations.
• Misconduct Resolution: In cases of proven scientific misconduct, plagiarism or fraudulent publication, the publisher, in collaboration with the editorial board, will take appropriate action to clarify the situation.
• Corrective Actions: The publisher is responsible for publishing an erratum or retracting the work in question when integrity is compromised.
• Disciplinary Enforcement: The publisher facilitates the debarment of authors found guilty of misconduct from publishing for a period of six months.

ii). Journal Governance and Support

• Editorial Independence: The publisher maintains the principle of editorial independence, ensuring that the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board have final authority over all publication decisions.
• Transparency and Disclosure: The publisher ensures that all policies regarding authorship, conflict of interest and AI usage are clearly communicated and enforced.
• Confidentiality Protections: The publisher provides the secure infrastructure necessary to maintain a Double-Blind Peer Review process, protecting the identity of both authors and reviewers.

iii). Content Preservation and Access

• Permanent Archiving: The publisher ensures the long-term preservation of the scholarly record and maintains the digital systems required for manuscript management.
• Technical Quality: The publisher oversees the technical requirements for manuscripts to ensure they meet the journal's standards and global indexing criteria.