Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
The Mustansiriyah Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences (MJPAS) employs a strict Double-Blind Peer Review process. This means the reviewers' identities are kept anonymous from the authors, and the authors' identities are kept anonymous from the reviewers. The journal utilizes the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform to efficiently and securely manage this peer review workflow. To ensure high-quality and original content, all submissions must present novel contributions and must not have been previously published or be under consideration by another academic journal.
Editorial Board Evaluation (Initial Screening)
Before sending the papers to external referees, the editorial board evaluates whether the manuscript aligns with the mission and scope of MJPAS and meets the basic formatting guidelines. Submissions that pass this initial screening are then sent to at least two independent, expert referees for a detailed and rigorous evaluation.
Review Outcome & Revisions
If a paper receives conflicting feedback (e.g., one positive and one negative review), it will be reevaluated by a third independent referee. If the majority of reviews yield negative feedback or recommend rejection, the paper will not be accepted for publication in MJPAS. Authors will receive constructive feedback, corrections, or suggestions from the referees and are required to make the necessary revisions within a specified timeframe before a final publication decision is reached.
Withdrawal of Paper
If authors wish to withdraw their paper from consideration for publication in MJPAS, they must submit a formal withdrawal request to the editorial board. It is the authors' responsibility to adhere to MJPAS's writing and style guidelines to ensure the overall quality of their papers. Please note that MJPAS does not provide any royalties or copyright fees to authors for the papers published in the journal.
Peer Review Workflow
1. Submission
Author submits paper via OJS
↓
2. Editorial Screening
Editor checks for scope and formatting
➜
Rejected Desk Reject
↓
3. Peer Review
Double-blind review by independent experts
↓
4. Revision
Author improves paper based on feedback
↓
5. Editor Assessment
Editor evaluates reviewer responses
➜
Rejected Final Rejection
↓
6. Accepted
Paper is accepted for publication
