Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

Pakistan Journal of Islamic Philosophy is a Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Research Journal. All articles submitted to the journal are sent to reviewer without the details of author and his institution.

  • Internal Review

Each paper goes through an internal review by a relevant Editorial Board/Team member to determine whether it is properly formatted and follows the publication ethics. The member would also consider whether basic protocols of research have been followed in research design/analysis and contribution to the literature. At the Pakistan Journal of Islamic Philosophy, proper desk review process has been employed where articles must go through a process of passing a desk rejection/acceptance system before sending to an expert of the field, papers that do not meet the basic requirements are not sent out for external review.

  • External Review

Pakistan Journal of Islamic Philosophy follows a double-blind review process after a paper is screened through the internal review. Authors are requested not to include their personal information in the text of the paper. They are further indicated not to post their papers on any website to prevent their identity to the potential reviewers. While reviewers are also expected to refuse if they come to know about the identification of the author(s) of a paper referred to them for peer review. External reviewers generally comment and suggest originality, quality of presentation, research design, data/results/conclusions, the usefulness of the study, and interest to the researcher's community. During an external review, if reviewers find that the research paper has major flaws that cannot be resolved through a major revision, they can recommend declining the paper.

  • Suggesting Reviewers

Following the HEC guidelines in letter and spirit, authors submitting their research papers to Pakistan Journal of Islamic Philosophy are not given an option to suggest potential reviewers for reviewing their research papers. While authors may indicate those scholars (due to any real or perceived conflict of interest) to whom they feel not suitable to serve as reviewers for their specific paper.

  • Criteria for Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected carefully based on the following criteria:

  1. Must hold a Ph.D. degree or advance professional qualification with extensive professional/academic experience, i.e. CFA, CMA etc.
  2. Recognized, well reputed expert in the field (having publications in reputable academic or professional research journals).
  3. Never co-authored a paper with the author(s).
  4. Not affiliated with the institution of author(s).
  5. Should have a good understanding of data analysis.
  • Resources Available to Reviewers

Reviewers of Pakistan Journal of Islamic Philosophy are reputable academic and professional researchers who have access to a wide range of research-related databases and other latest material. If reviewers need further material to complete their review, it is also provided to them.

  • Ethics for Reviewers

All reviewers are encouraged to follow the HEC guidelines for reviewers to meet their responsibilities in relation to objectivity, promptness, conflict of interest, confidentiality and reporting.

  • Steps in Peer Review Process

Peer review process can be broadly described as:

S.No

Steps of Review Process

Estimated Time

1

Submission of paper

-

2

First Internal Review *

     1 week

3

External Review

     1-2 weeks

4

Communication of review reports to authors for minor/ major revision **

     1 week

5

Submission of the revised paper

      1-2 weeks

6

Second internal review (to assess whether reviewers suggestions have been incorporated satisfactorily) ***

      1 week

7

Acceptance of paper (on successful submission of revised paper)

      1 week

* Paper is returned to authors if it does not meet the basic criteria.

** Paper is returned to authors if external reviewers find that the research paper has so serious faults that cannot be resolved through a major revision.

*** Authors are requested for further revision if editors find that reviewers’ suggestions have not been incorporated satisfactorily.

Note: Authors are requested to revise the paper carefully in accordance with the reviewers’ suggestions to avoid unnecessary delay in the review process.

  • Resubmission of Paper (after peer review)

Nearly every published paper goes through at least one revision. Authors should take a revision request as good news and an opportunity to learn and improve the quality of their research paper. They are directed to revise the paper carefully in accordance with the reviewers’ suggestions to avoid needless interruption in the review process. Generally, when the review report is provided each review point is required to either be incorporated in the revised version of the paper or an appropriate response is expected from the Author. Author(s) should be very careful regarding accuracy and completeness in accordance with the reviewers’ suggested points, so as to avoid further review and delay (further revision can be recommended if editors find that reviewers’ suggestions have not been incorporated satisfactorily).

Keeping in view the other academic/professional commitments, authors may request extra time, if they feel that revision needs more effort and time to improve the quality of the paper.