Peer Review Policy

Peer-Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to the International Journal for Development of Science & Technology (IJDST) are evaluated through a rigorous peer-review process designed to ensure the quality, originality, academic relevance, and integrity of published research.

1. Initial Editorial Checks

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine whether they:

• Fall within the scope and aims of IJDST.
• Follow the journal's manuscript preparation and submission requirements.
• Meet the journal's publication ethics and research integrity standards.
• Include all necessary declarations and disclosures.
• Contain appropriate and relevant references.
• Meet the required standards of academic English and presentation.
• Satisfy the journal's originality and plagiarism requirements.

Manuscripts may be returned to authors for correction if they do not meet the basic formatting or submission requirements. Manuscripts with insufficient originality, serious methodological or technical weaknesses, inadequate academic contribution, ethical concerns, or substantial non-compliance with the journal's requirements may be rejected at the editorial stage without being sent for external peer review.

2. Plagiarism and Originality Screening

All submitted manuscripts may be screened for plagiarism and other forms of inappropriate text reuse using appropriate similarity-detection methods. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts are original and that all sources, quotations, ideas, data, and other materials taken from existing work are appropriately acknowledged and cited.

3. Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial assessment are sent for double-anonymous peer review, where the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential. Manuscripts are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, methodology, academic quality, clarity, significance, and contribution to the field. The journal may appoint additional reviewers when necessary to reach a well-informed editorial decision.

4. Editorial Decision and Revision

The Editor considers the reviewers' reports and makes the editorial decision based on the overall academic quality and suitability of the manuscript. A manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

The Editor-in-Chief retains responsibility for the final editorial decision. Where revisions are requested, authors must respond to the reviewers' and Editor's comments carefully and provide a point-by-point response explaining the changes made in the revised manuscript. If an author disagrees with a reviewer's recommendation, the author may provide a clear academic justification in the response letter.

5. Re-Review of Revised Manuscripts

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation, particularly when substantial revisions have been requested. The Editor may also make the final decision based on the revised manuscript and the authors' response.

6. Confidentiality and Ethical Review

All manuscripts and reviewer reports are treated as confidential. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and unbiased assessments and to disclose any potential conflict of interest.

IJDST does not permit manipulation of the peer-review process, fabricated reviewer identities, fraudulent review reports, or any other form of peer-review misconduct. The journal may take appropriate action in accordance with its Malpractices and Misconduct Policy if ethical concerns arise during the review process.