Peer Review Policy

AL-ĪMĀN Research Journal (IRJ) follows a double-anonymous peer review process for scholarly research articles.

The journal's peer review process is designed to ensure academic quality, originality, scholarly relevance, methodological soundness, and integrity while maintaining confidentiality and impartiality.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first examined by the editorial office to determine whether they:

  • fall within the scope of AL-ĪMĀN Research Journal (IRJ);

  • comply with the journal's submission and formatting requirements;

  • meet basic standards of academic quality and scholarly presentation;

  • contain appropriate academic references; and

  • comply with the journal's publication ethics and research integrity policies.

The initial editorial screening does not constitute final acceptance or rejection based solely on the academic merits of the manuscript.

The editor may reject a manuscript at the initial stage if it is clearly outside the journal's scope, does not meet the journal's basic requirements, or presents serious ethical, originality, or quality concerns.

2. Double-Anonymous Peer Review

Research articles that pass the initial editorial screening are normally sent for double-anonymous peer review.

Under this process:

  • The identity of the author(s) is not disclosed to the reviewers.

  • The identity of the reviewers is not disclosed to the author(s).

  • Reviewers are independent experts in the relevant subject area.

  • Reviewers should not be members of the journal's editorial decision-making team for the manuscript they are reviewing.

Authors should therefore ensure that the submitted manuscript does not unnecessarily reveal their identity in the anonymized review version.

3. Number and Selection of Reviewers

Each research article is normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with appropriate academic expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript.

Reviewers are selected according to their:

  • subject expertise;

  • academic qualifications and research experience;

  • suitability for the manuscript's topic;

  • independence from the authors; and

  • absence of identifiable conflicts of interest.

The journal does not guarantee that an author-recommended reviewer will be selected.

4. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, confidentially, and within the requested timeframe.

Reviewers should assess, where applicable:

  • originality and contribution to knowledge;

  • relevance to the journal's scope;

  • clarity of research objectives;

  • adequacy of methodology;

  • accuracy and coherence of analysis;

  • quality and relevance of references;

  • scholarly argumentation;

  • ethical considerations;

  • clarity of presentation; and

  • overall academic quality.

Reviewers should provide constructive comments that can assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

Reviewers must not use, copy, disclose, or exploit unpublished information contained in a manuscript for personal or professional advantage.

5. Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality.

A reviewer should decline the review where a conflict of interest could reasonably compromise the objectivity or confidentiality of the review.

Conflicts may include, but are not limited to:

  • close personal or professional relationships with the author(s);

  • recent collaboration with the author(s);

  • institutional relationships that may affect impartiality;

  • financial or professional interests connected with the manuscript; or

  • any other circumstance that could reasonably affect independent judgment.

6. Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted to AL-ĪMĀN Research Journal (IRJ) are treated as confidential documents during the editorial and peer review process.

Reviewers must not:

  • share the manuscript with unauthorized persons;

  • disclose the identity of the authors;

  • discuss the manuscript publicly;

  • use unpublished information from the manuscript for personal research or advantage; or

  • upload confidential manuscript material to public or third-party generative AI systems.

7. Use of Artificial Intelligence by Reviewers

Reviewers must not use generative artificial intelligence or other automated systems to generate peer-review assessments of confidential manuscripts.

Reviewers must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and must not upload manuscript content or confidential peer-review material to external AI tools.

Any permitted use of automated tools must not compromise confidentiality, academic integrity, or the review process and must comply with the journal's Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Automated Tools.

8. Editorial Decision

Following the completion of peer review, the editor or authorized editorial decision-maker considers the reviewers' reports together with the manuscript and the journal's editorial standards.

Possible decisions include:

  • Accept;

  • Minor revisions;

  • Major revisions; or

  • Reject.

The editor may request further review where the reviewers' recommendations are substantially different, insufficiently justified, or where additional expert assessment is considered necessary.

A positive recommendation from a reviewer does not automatically guarantee acceptance.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's authorized editor or editorial decision-maker.

9. Revision and Re-Review

Where revisions are requested, authors may be required to submit a revised manuscript together with a response explaining how the reviewers' comments have been addressed.

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or sent to new reviewers when further independent assessment is considered necessary.

Submission of a revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance.

10. Special Issues and Guest-Edited Content

Research articles published in special issues are subject to the same quality-control and peer-review standards as articles published in regular issues.

Guest editors or special-issue editors may participate in the editorial process, but they must follow the journal's peer-review, confidentiality, conflict-of-interest, and publication-ethics requirements.

Where a guest editor has a conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript, the manuscript should be handled by an independent editor.

11. Editorial Board Members as Authors

Members of the editorial board may submit manuscripts to AL-ĪMĀN Research Journal (IRJ).

However, an editor or editorial board member who is an author of a submitted manuscript must not participate in the editorial decision or peer-review management of that manuscript.

Such manuscripts are handled through an independent editorial process and are subject to the same peer-review standards as manuscripts submitted by other authors.

12. Exceptions to Peer Review

The journal's scholarly research articles are subject to the peer-review process described in this policy.

Any content that is not intended to constitute a scholarly research article may be subject to a different editorial process, where applicable. The review status of such content will be determined according to its type and will be clearly indicated where necessary.

13. Peer Review Reports

Peer-review reports are normally confidential and are not routinely published alongside articles.

Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors unless the journal formally changes its peer-review model and publicly announces such a change.

14. Publication Dates

For published research articles, AL-ĪMĀN Research Journal (IRJ) aims to provide publication information including, where applicable, the dates of submission, acceptance, and publication.

15. Appeals

Authors who believe that a manuscript decision was based on a significant procedural error, misunderstanding, or relevant information that was not properly considered may submit an appeal in accordance with the journal's Complaints and Appeals Policy.

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.

16. No Guarantee of Acceptance

AL-ĪMĀN Research Journal (IRJ) does not guarantee acceptance or publication of any submitted manuscript.

Editorial decisions are based on the journal's scope, editorial standards, peer-review findings, research integrity requirements, originality, scholarly quality, and other relevant academic considerations.

17. Policy and Transparency

The peer-review process of AL-ĪMĀN Research Journal (IRJ) is designed to maintain academic independence, confidentiality, fairness, and transparency.

The journal may update its peer-review procedures when necessary to reflect developments in scholarly publishing standards and best practices.

Any significant change to the peer-review model will be clearly stated on the journal's website.