Peer Review Process

1. Overview
All manuscripts submitted to Istiqsha: Adnin Journal of Integrative Islamic Inquiry undergo a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to ensure high-quality scholarly publication and academic integrity. The peer review system is designed to provide constructive feedback to authors, uphold ethical research standards, and maintain the journal’s commitment to integrative Islamic inquiry and interdisciplinary scholarship.

2. Initial Screening
Each submission is first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor to determine:

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope and aims.
  • Originality, clarity, and academic contribution.
  • Compliance with the Author Guidelines, Plagiarism Policy, and ethical standards.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to the author for revision or rejected before the peer-review stage.

3. Plagiarism Check
All manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using software such as Turnitin or iThenticate. Only manuscripts with a similarity index below 20% (excluding references and quotes) proceed to peer review.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review
Qualified reviewers are assigned based on their academic expertise and familiarity with the manuscript’s subject area. In the double-blind system:

  • Reviewers do not know the authors’ identities.
  • Authors do not know the reviewers’ identities.

Each manuscript is typically reviewed by two reviewers, though the Editor-in-Chief may assign a third reviewer in cases of conflicting recommendations.

5. Review Criteria

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope and objectives.
  • Originality and significance of contribution.
  • Clarity and organization of writing.
  • Adequacy of methodology and data analysis.
  • Depth of discussion and theoretical integration.
  • Quality of references and citations.
  • Ethical and academic integrity.

6. Review Timeline
The peer-review process generally follows this timeline:

  • Initial Editorial Screening: 1 week
  • Peer Review: 3–4 weeks per round
  • Revision and Final Decision: 2–3 weeks

Authors will be notified promptly of editorial decisions and may be asked to revise and resubmit based on reviewers’ comments.

7. Review Timeline
After receiving the reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept as is.
  • Accept with minor revisions.
  • Revisions required (major revision and resubmission).
  • Reject.

All decisions are communicated through the OJS platform. Editors ensure that feedback is constructive and professional.

8. Revision Process

  • Address each reviewer’s comment point-by-point in a Response Letter.
  • Highlight revisions clearly in the updated manuscript.
  • Resubmit the revised version through OJS within the specified time.

Revised manuscripts may undergo a second round of review if deemed necessary by the editors.

9. Final Proof and Publication
Once accepted, manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout editing, and final proof approval before online publication. Authors will receive galley proofs for final verification prior to publication.

10. Ethical Standards
The journal adheres to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. All parties—editors, reviewers, and authors—are expected to maintain confidentiality, transparency, and integrity throughout the review and publication process.