Peer Review Process
ReligioConstruction Journal employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest quality of published research. All submissions are evaluated based on originality, significance, technical quality, and clarity.
Review Steps
1. Initial Check
The editorial office screens each manuscript for compliance with journal scope, formatting guidelines, and plagiarism check using iThenticate.
2. Editor Assignment
An appropriate Associate Editor is assigned based on subject expertise to oversee the review.
3. Reviewer Selection
Two to three independent experts are invited to review the manuscript anonymously.
4. Review Reports
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide constructive feedback and recommendations (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, Reject).
5. Decision
The Associate Editor synthesizes reviewer comments and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief, who issues the final decision.
6. Revision
Authors revise the manuscript addressing all reviewer comments and resubmit within the given timeframe.
7. Final Acceptance
Upon satisfactory revision, the manuscript is accepted, copy-edited, typeset, and scheduled for publication.
Reviewer Guidelines
We ask reviewers to maintain confidentiality, avoid conflicts of interest, provide objective feedback, and adhere to review deadlines.
Ethical Considerations
The journal follows COPE guidelines to handle ethical issues such as plagiarism, data falsification, and duplicate publication.