Peer Review Process
EduSphere: Journal of Multidisciplinary Education Research applies a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic contribution of every manuscript. Each submission is evaluated through a structured editorial and review procedure before a final publication decision is made.
Double-Blind Peer Review
EduSphere implements a double-blind peer review system. In this process, the identity of the authors is not disclosed to the reviewers, and the identity of the reviewers is not disclosed to the authors. This approach helps maintain objectivity, fairness, and academic integrity throughout the evaluation process.
Stages of Peer Review
Every manuscript submitted to EduSphere passes through the following stages before it is accepted, revised, or rejected.
Submission Received
Authors submit the manuscript through the journal submission system. The editorial office confirms that the submission has been received.
Initial Editorial Screening
The editor evaluates the manuscript for scope relevance, basic structure, academic quality, originality, and compliance with the journal guidelines.
Plagiarism and Similarity Check
The manuscript may undergo similarity screening to identify potential overlap, plagiarism, or inappropriate citation practices before the peer review stage begins.
Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with relevant expertise in the submitted topic.
Peer Review Evaluation
Reviewers assess the manuscript based on originality, clarity, methodology, theoretical contribution, relevance, and significance of the findings or arguments presented.
Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor makes a decision regarding the manuscript and communicates the result to the author.
Author Revision
If revision is required, the author is asked to improve the manuscript and submit a revised version along with a response to the reviewer comments.
Final Decision and Publication
After the revision and final editorial evaluation, the manuscript may be accepted for publication, returned for further revision, or rejected if it does not meet the journal standards.
Possible Editorial Decisions
After completing the review and editorial evaluation, one of the following decisions may be issued.
Accept Submission
The manuscript is accepted because it meets the journal standards and requires no further substantive revision.
Minor Revisions Required
The manuscript is publishable after the author addresses limited corrections, clarifications, or editorial improvements.
Major Revisions Required
The manuscript has potential, but substantial revisions are necessary before it can be reconsidered for publication.
Reject Submission
The manuscript is rejected because it does not sufficiently meet the academic, methodological, or scope requirements of the journal.
Principles of the Review Process
Confidentiality
All manuscripts and review materials are treated as confidential documents and may not be shared without authorization.
Objectivity
Reviewers are expected to provide fair, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations without personal bias.
Academic Integrity
Editors, reviewers, and authors are expected to uphold ethical publication standards throughout the review process.
Constructive Feedback
Reviewer comments should support the improvement of the manuscript and help authors strengthen the quality of their work.
