Peer Review Policy

**Peer Review Policy**

1. Purpose
The purpose of this peer review policy is to outline the process and guidelines for the rigorous and fair evaluation of submitted manuscripts in MJII. Peer review plays a critical role in ensuring the quality, validity, and integrity of the scholarly content published in the journal.

2. Types of Peer Review
MJII employs a single-blind peer review process, where the identities of the reviewers are unknown to the authors. The journal follows either a two-fold or three-fold peer review process, depending on the complexity and relevance of the submitted manuscript.

3. Selection of Reviewers
The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, is responsible for appointing qualified reviewers based on their expertise in the subject area relevant to the manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on their knowledge, experience, and track record in the field to ensure the highest level of evaluation.

4. Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to fulfill the following responsibilities:
a. Review manuscripts within the agreed-upon timeframe, typically 4 weeks, and provide constructive and unbiased feedback to the authors.
b. Maintain confidentiality and not disclose any information about the manuscript or its review to any third party without prior permission from the journal.
c. Declare any potential conflicts of interest that may affect the impartiality or objectivity of their review and notify the Editor-in-Chief promptly.
d. Assess the originality, methodology, clarity, significance, and ethical standards of the manuscript objectively, with due consideration to the journal's scope and guidelines.
e. Provide specific and constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscript and, if necessary, offer recommendations for revisions or reject the manuscript with appropriate justifications.

5. Author-Reviewer Interaction
To facilitate clarity and enhance the quality of peer review, MJII allows authors to respond to reviewer comments and revise their manuscripts accordingly. Authors are encouraged to address all reviewer comments and provide clear explanations for any changes made in the revised version.

6. Editorial Decision-making
Based on the reviewer feedback and assessment, the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, makes a well-informed decision on the manuscript. The possible decisions include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection. The decision is communicated to the authors along with the reviewers' comments and recommendations.

7. Timeliness and Efficiency
MJII is committed to ensuring a timely and efficient peer review process. Authors can expect to receive the first decision on their manuscripts within an average of 8 weeks from the date of submission. Reviewers are appreciated for promptly completing their reviews and meeting the agreed-upon deadlines.

8. Reviewer Recognition
MJII acknowledges the valuable contribution of reviewers to the peer review process. Reviewers who consistently provide high-quality reviews and demonstrate dedication to their responsibilities may be recognized and acknowledged by the journal through various means, such as a reviewer appreciation program or public acknowledgments.

9. Reviewer Training and Development
MJII supports the continuous professional development of reviewers by providing resources, feedback, and guidance on best practices in peer review. The journal also encourages reviewers to keep abreast of emerging trends, guidelines, and standards in scholarly publishing and research ethics.

This peer review policy ensures that MJII maintains high standards of editorial integrity, transparency, and quality in the selection and assessment of manuscripts. By following this policy, MJII aims to foster innovation, improve research outcomes, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field.