PEER REVIEW POLICY
Overview
Open Arc Journal of Research and Innovation (OAJRI) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and scholarly excellence. All manuscripts submitted to OAJRI undergo a rigorous peer review process before acceptance for publication.
Review Process
OAJRI follows a Double-Blind Peer Review process, in which both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the entire review process. This approach ensures objectivity, fairness, and impartiality in the evaluation of submitted manuscripts.
Review Stages
1. Initial Editorial Screening Upon submission, the manuscript is first reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor to assess whether it falls within the journal's aims and scope, meets minimum quality standards, and complies with the submission guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet these basic requirements may be desk-rejected without being sent for peer review.
2. Peer Review Assignment Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research background, and absence of conflicts of interest.
3. Reviewer Evaluation Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
- Originality and novelty of the research
- Clarity and quality of writing
- Soundness of methodology and research design
- Validity and interpretation of results
- Relevance and completeness of references
- Overall contribution to the field
4. Editorial Decision Based on reviewer recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:
- Accept — the manuscript is accepted as submitted
- Minor Revision — minor changes are required before acceptance
- Major Revision — substantial revisions are required and the manuscript will undergo re-review
- Reject — the manuscript does not meet the journal's standards for publication
5. Revision and Re-review Authors whose manuscripts require revision are given a specified timeframe to submit a revised version along with a detailed response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation.
Timeline
| Stage | Estimated Duration |
|---|---|
| Initial Editorial Screening | 3–5 working days |
| Peer Review Process | 3–6 weeks |
| Author Revision Period | 2–4 weeks |
| Final Editorial Decision | 1–2 weeks |
| Total Average Time to Decision | 6–12 weeks |
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
- Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations
- Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscript content
- Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment
- Avoid using unpublished information from reviewed manuscripts for personal advantage
Appeals
Authors who believe their manuscript was rejected due to a misunderstanding or factual error may submit a formal appeal to the editorial office at editor@openarcjournal.com. Appeals must clearly state the grounds for reconsideration. The Editor-in-Chief's decision on appeals is final.
Plagiarism Detection
All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using similarity detection software prior to peer review. Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding acceptable thresholds will be returned to authors for revision or rejected outright depending on the severity of the case.
