Evaluation Process

1. Manuscripts uploaded to the IJCOMAR Manuscript Tracking System by the author(s) are first reviewed by the Issue Editor for initial compliance. Manuscripts passing this preliminary check are forwarded by the Editor-in-Chief to the relevant Section Editors in the respective disciplines.
2. Section Editors initiate the peer review process once they agree that the manuscript contributes to the relevant discipline(s). Submitted manuscripts undergo blind peer review; therefore, authors must ensure that no identifying information, explicit or implicit, is included. Author names and details will only be revealed to editors upon successful completion of peer review and acceptance for publication.
3. Every manuscript uploaded to the IJCOMAR Manuscript Tracking System undergoes a preliminary evaluation by the Editor or Assistant Editors regarding conformity with writing and publication guidelines, as well as thematic relevance to the journal. Manuscripts requiring correction are returned to the authors with comments. Manuscripts containing hate speech or discriminatory language or failing to meet writing, publication standards, or disciplinary focus are rejected without peer review.
4. Manuscripts passing preliminary evaluation are sent to peer reviewers selected by the Editor or Section Editors. Reviewers are experts in the relevant scientific or artistic fields with demonstrated professional competence. The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential according to the double-blind review principle.
5. The peer review process has a maximum duration of 20 days, extendable by 15 days upon reviewer request. If this deadline is exceeded without submission of a report, a replacement reviewer is appointed.
6. Manuscripts receiving positive reports from both reviewers are accepted for publication. If one report is negative, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. Considering publication timelines, the manuscript may be simultaneously sent to three reviewers. The final publication decision is based on the third reviewer’s report.
7. Reviewers may recommend acceptance without revisions, request revisions without requiring re-review, or request revisions to be re-evaluated. Revised manuscripts are either accepted or returned to reviewers accordingly. Authors are granted 20 days to submit revisions; failure to comply is considered a rejection by the reviewer. Revised manuscripts sent for re-evaluation receive 20 days for review, extendable by 15 days upon reviewer request. If this period lapses, a new reviewer may be appointed, or the editor may approve the revisions without further review.
8. Authors have the right to appeal revision requests with well-reasoned arguments. Appeals are reviewed impartially by the journal management and, if necessary, by field representatives. If the appeal is justified, the contested revision requests are deemed non-binding.
9. IJCOMAR maintains transparency by informing authors of their manuscripts’ current evaluation stage via the Manuscript Tracking System. Authors can monitor progress through their member profiles on the website. Since authors are allowed only one change request in the system, the peer review process must be carefully monitored to ensure both reviewers submit their evaluations.
10. Issue Editors closely monitor the progress of requested corrections noted in reviewer reports. The editorial board oversees the relationship between reviewer comments and manuscript revisions. Final publication decisions rest with the editorial board.