PEER REVIEW POLICY

The Journal of Basrah Researches (JoBRS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of peer review to ensure the publication of purposeful research content. The journal's editors employ selection processes designed to avoid bias, prioritizing the scientific content of the article over considerations related to specific institutions, countries, or regions.

JoBRS adopts a double-blind review system, where both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. This approach promotes objectivity and fairness in the review process, ensuring that evaluations are based solely on the quality and novelty of the submitted work. The identity and affiliations of both parties are kept confidential, fostering an environment of impartiality and respect for the integrity of the research.

In managing its research submission and review process, JoBRS utilizes the Open Journal Systems (OJS), a comprehensive tool for journal management. Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes a similarity check using tools like Turnitin. Manuscripts with a similarity percentage exceeding 20% are rejected by the Editorial Board. For those below this threshold, the similarity report is reviewed by the Board to assess the author’s adherence to publishing ethics.

Following the similarity evaluation, the journal’s editors conduct a preliminary review focusing on the relevance of the scientific content to the journal’s scope and the researcher’s compliance with scientific and publishing ethics. If the manuscript meets these criteria, it is sent to a minimum of three expert reviewers, who are given 30 days to provide their evaluations. Reviewers must submit detailed reports and recommendations via the OJS platform, aiding the Editorial Board in making informed decisions.

The Editor-in-Chief, with input from the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, decides whether to accept, request revisions, or reject the manuscript. If significant revisions are required, the manuscript may either undergo a second round of review or be rejected with the option to resubmit after necessary modifications. In cases where the first round of reviews is inconclusive, additional reviewers may be consulted.

The final decision on acceptance is based on the scientific and technical soundness of the work as determined by the reviewers. If authors disagree with the reviewers’ comments, they can submit a detailed response for reconsideration.

Possible outcomes based on reviewers’ reports:
1. Publish unaltered (accepted): The article is published in JoBRS without further modifications.
2. Publish with minor revisions (accepted): The article is accepted, subject to minor corrections within 30 days.
3. Publish with major revisions (conditional acceptance): The article is conditionally accepted, requiring significant modifications. A 60-day period, extendable upon request, is provided for these revisions.
4. Reject, inappropriate material (unacceptable): The article is rejected due to unsuitable scientific content, with no scope for modification.

The final decision involves the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board, who provide insights and advice throughout the evaluation process. The Editorial Board plays a key role in managing the peer review process, ensuring its integrity and efficiency.

Appeals against decisions can be made to the Editor-in-Chief, particularly if a decision is believed to be flawed or biased. Appeals should be detailed and address all points raised by reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, will reconsider the decision based on these appeals.

For any queries or appeals regarding the peer review process, authors can contact the Editor-in-Chief at “bjrs@jobrs.edu.iq”. The Editorial Board is dedicated to ensuring a fair, objective, and timely review process for all submissions.