Peer Review Policy

The following is the review process that every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes during the course of the peer-review process.

The entire review process is performed using the online submission. Once a manuscript is submitted, the manuscript is assigned to an editor most appropriate to handle it based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the editors. First, the editor evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare but entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be rejected at this stage. Those rejected at this stage either lack of originality, have poor grammar or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Should the editor decide not to assign reviewers but instead reject the submission, they are required to provide comments that will be sent to the author.

If the editor determines that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the journal, papers will be refereed by at least 3 or 4 experts (reviewers) as suggested by the editorial board. The deadline to complete the review process is 1-3 weeks. The reviewers will then submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendations for one of the following actions to the editor:


- Accept

- Consider after Minor Changes

- Consider after Major Changes

- Reject

When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations:

- Publish

- Consider after Minor Changes

- Consider after Major Changes

- Reject

If the editor recommends “Publish,” the manuscript is accepted for publication.

If the editor recommends “Consider after Minor Changes,” the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. Only the editor reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted.

If the editor recommends “Consider after Major Changes,” the recommendation is communicated to the authors. The authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the changes recommended by the reviewers and to submit their revised manuscript in a timely manner. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the editor can then make an editorial recommendation, which can be “Publish” or “Consider after Minor Changes” or “Reject.”.

If the editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Additionally, if two of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate.

The editors have the authority to reject any manuscript due to the inappropriateness of its subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of its results.

IJRAT uses double-blind peer review process, which means that both the reviewer(s) and author(s) identities are concealed from the reviewer(s), and vice versa, throughout the review process. This means that the reviewer(s) of the paper won’t get to know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) won’t get to know the identity of the reviewer(s). Peer review helps validate research, establish a method by which it can be evaluated, and increase networking possibilities within research communities. Despite criticisms, peer review is still the only widely accepted method for research validation.

IJRAT uses following double blind peer review process:
A Review Process