Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the SPAMAST Research Journal (SRJ) undergo a double-blind peer review process prior to publication. The double-blind system ensures that both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous, helping to maintain objectivity and fairness in the evaluation.

When a manuscript is sent for external review, all identifying information—including the authors’ names, affiliations, contact details, funding sources, conflicts of interest, and acknowledgments—is removed. At least two external expert reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, quality, and contribution to the field.

Reviewers recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected. If there are conflicting recommendations, a third reviewer will be invited to provide a decisive evaluation. Authors who are asked to revise or correct their manuscripts must resubmit them within the specified deadline, addressing all reviewer comments.

Authors may respond to the referees’ feedback, either making revisions or explaining why certain suggestions are not applicable. The editor considers the revised manuscript, evaluating whether the reviewers’ comments have been addressed satisfactorily. Once all concerns are resolved, the paper is accepted for publication.