Peer Review Process

The Acceptance Process

The articles sent by authors are first reviewed by the editor of the publication (one day to one week).

If the writing rules+ approval of the commitment form + conflict form + similarity report confirmation are followed, it will be sent to the reviewers. Otherwise, it will either be rejected due to the withdrawal of a subject or it will be returned to the author to correct the mentioned items.

After sending the article to the editorial board, the result will be reviewed and announced to the authors.

Authors whose articles must be revised must make the necessary corrections within 15 days and send the revised version of the article. If the corrections are approved by the reviewers and the editorial board, initial acceptance will be issued to the authors.


Printing Process

Accepted articles are categorized and placed in the spring, summer, or autumn and winter issues.

The article is sent for scientific and literary editing, at this stage, the authors may be asked to make minor changes to the article.

After fixing the editing errors, the files are sent for layout.

To achieve the goals, the scientific journal of The New Islamic Civilization Fundamental Studies reviews and publishes the submitted manuscripts entirely unbiased and accurately. The evaluation process was defined and regulated to enable the authors to assess the trustworthiness of the evaluation process. The respected authors are asked to read this section carefully, if there is any question contact us via the contact link or the e-mail address.  

  1. Recommendation on submitting the manuscript
    1. To read the journal’s aims and scope to make sure it is a match.
    2. To follow the established guidelines and formal requirements of the journal
    3. To observe the ethical charter of the journal
    4. To pay attention to evaluation criteria and answering the editor-in-chief’s reviewer(s)’s questions accurately
  2. The evaluation process of the article
    1. Registration in the system and submitting the manuscript by the corresponding author.
    2. Reviewing the structure of the article by the editorial board
    3. Submitting the article to similar systems such as Samim Noor by the executive editor
    4. Checking the article for plagiarism by the editorial board
    5. A preliminary review of the article by the editor-in-chief
    6. Reviewing the article by the reviewer(s); the article is often sent to 2-4 reviewers. They review the article based on 3 criteria including “authenticity”, “quality”, and “presentation”.
    7. Selecting the reviewer by editor-in-chief
    8. Sending the article to the reviewer(s) by the executive editor
    9. Tracking the status of reviewing the submitted article by the executive editor and associate editors
    10. Accepting or rejecting the article by the editor-in-chief and associate editors
    11. Announcement of the corresponding author about rejecting, revising, or accepting by the executive editor.
  3. Criteria for evaluating the article
    1. To be innovative and updated
    2. To be scientific and professional
    3. The journal publishes articles that cover applied and theoretical approaches in the scientific community
    4. To be coherent
    5. The coherence of the different parts of the article including the abstract, introduction, main body, discussion, and conclusion
    6. The cohesion of the materials, avoiding unrelated materials
    7. To use main and novel references
    8. To observe writing/editing principles, to use terms/expressions correctly
  4. Results of evaluation of the article
    1. Reject the article
    2. Accept after minor revisions, after revising, the article is reviewed by the editor-in-chief
    3. Accept after major revisions, after revising, the article is sent to the same reviewers
    4. Accept without any changes
  5. Rejection of the article
    1. The article suggests elements of plagiarism
    2. The article does not fall within the aims and scope of the journal)
    3. The article does not conform to the journal’s author guidelines
    4. The article is rejected based on the editor-in-chief’s/ reviewer(s)’s decision, the article fails to get enough scores during the evaluation process
  6. Article review timeline
    1. A preliminary review by the editor-in-chief (about a week)
    2. Reviewing the article in terms of observing the author guidelines by the executive editor (3 days)
    3. Reviewing by two reviewers (3 months)
    4. Revising (a month)
    5. Comparative review (a month)
    6. Preparing the article for publication (a month)