Purpose
The preliminary editorial review is conducted before assigning manuscripts to external reviewers. The objective is to ensure academic integrity, originality, language quality, methodological soundness, and alignment with the journal’s scope.
Editorial Screening Parameters
| Parameter | Description |
|---|---|
| Conceptual Plagiarism | Duplication of ideas, models, frameworks, hypotheses, or research contributions without proper attribution. |
| Textual Plagiarism | Direct copying or excessive similarity of text from published or unpublished sources. |
| Grammatical Quality | Language clarity, academic writing quality, readability, and presentation standards. |
| Novelty | Original contribution to knowledge, theory, methodology, practice, policy, or technology. |
| Revision Requirement | Extent of revisions needed before peer review or publication consideration. |
Preliminary Editorial Decision Matrix
Category A: Eligible for Peer Review (Desk Acceptance)
| Conceptual Plagiarism | Textual Plagiarism | Grammar Issues | Novelty | Revision Required | Preliminary Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | Low | Low | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | Low | Medium | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | Low | High | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | Medium | Low | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | Medium | Medium | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | Medium | High | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | High | Low | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | High | Medium | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
| Low | High | High | High | Yes | ACCEPT FOR REVIEW |
Editorial Guideline
A manuscript may proceed to peer review when:
- Conceptual originality is evident.
- Novelty is rated High.
- Similarity concerns are correctable.
- Language deficiencies can be improved through revision.
- Research design demonstrates scientific merit.
Category B: Major Revision Before Review
| Conceptual Plagiarism | Textual Plagiarism | Grammar Issues | Novelty | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | Medium/High | High | Medium | Major Revision |
| Low | Low | High | Medium | Major Revision |
| Medium | Low | Low/Medium | High | Major Revision |
| Medium | Medium | Medium | High | Major Revision |
Editorial Guideline
The manuscript may be returned to authors for substantial improvement when:
- Novelty is moderate but promising.
- Methodological contribution exists.
- Language quality significantly affects readability.
- Similarity concerns are remediable.
Category C: Desk Rejection
| Conceptual Plagiarism | Textual Plagiarism | Novelty | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| High | Any | Any | Reject |
| Medium/High | High | Any | Reject |
| Any | Very High | Any | Reject |
| Any | Any | Low | Reject |
| High | Medium | Medium | Reject |
| High | Low | High | Reject |
Automatic Rejection Conditions
A manuscript shall be rejected without peer review if:
- Conceptual plagiarism exceeds acceptable scholarly standards.
- Research lacks originality or novelty.
- Similarity index indicates extensive unattributed copying.
- Fabricated, manipulated, or unverifiable data are detected.
- Ethical approval requirements are not satisfied.
- Manuscript falls outside the journal’s aims and scope.
- AI-generated content substantially replaces scholarly contribution without disclosure.
- Citation manipulation or self-citation abuse is identified.
Editorial Threshold Recommendations
| Criterion | Recommended Standard |
|---|---|
| Similarity / Self-Similarity Index | ≤ 25% |
| Single Source Similarity | ≤ 5% |
| Novelty Score | High Preferred |
| Grammar Quality | Academic English Required |
| Reference Currency | Minimum 30–40% references from last 10 years With DOI/URL |
| International Relevance | Preferred |
| Ethical Compliance | Mandatory |
| AI Disclosure | Mandatory if applicable |
Acceptance Ratio Policy
The journal follows a selective publication model.
| Stage | Approximate Rate |
|---|---|
| Initial Submissions | 100% |
| Desk Rejection | 30–50% |
| Sent for Peer Review | 70–50% |
| Major Revision | 50–40% |
| Final Acceptance | ~40% |
This policy supports scholarly quality, research integrity, international visibility, and future indexing readiness, including evaluation criteria commonly considered by databases such as Scopus and other international indexing agencies.