Peer Review Policy

Breathing Academia Journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous and transparent peer review process. Our peer review policy ensures that all submitted manuscripts are evaluated fairly and thoroughly by experts in the relevant fields.

1. Peer Review Process

1.1 Initial Review:

• Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial review by the editorial team to assess their alignment with the journal’s scope and adherence to submission guidelines.
• Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to the author for revision or rejected without further review.

1.2 Selection of Reviewers:

• Manuscripts that pass the initial review are assigned to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field.
• Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, publication record, and ability to provide an objective evaluation.

1.3 Double-Blind Review:

• Breathing Academia Journalemploys a double-blind peer review process, where both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other.
• This process helps to eliminate potential biases and ensures a fair evaluation based solely on the quality of the research.

1.4 Review Criteria: Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Originality:The manuscript presents original research or offers a novel perspective on existing work.
• Relevance:The manuscript aligns with the journal’s scope and addresses significant issues in the field.
• Methodology:The research design, methods, and analysis are robust, appropriate, and clearly described.
• Significance:The findings contribute meaningfully to the academic discourse and offer valuable insights or implications.
• Clarity and Structure:The manuscript is well-organized, clearly written, and free from grammatical or typographical errors.

1.5 Review Outcomes: Reviewers provide feedback and recommend one of the following decisions:

• Accept:The manuscript is accepted for publication as is.
• Minor Revisions:The manuscript requires minor revisions based on reviewer feedback. Authors are given a specified timeframe to address the comments and resubmit.
• Major Revisions:The manuscript requires significant revisions. Authors must revise the manuscript extensively and resubmit it for further review.
• Reject:The manuscript is not suitable for publication in its current form. Authors are provided with feedback and may choose to submit to another journal.

1.6 Confidentiality:

• All manuscripts and reviewer comments are handled confidentially. Reviewers are required to keep the content of the manuscripts and their comments confidential.
• Manuscripts are not to be shared or discussed with anyone outside the peer review process.

1.7 Appeals:

• Authors who disagree with the review decision may appeal by submitting a written request to the editorial board.
• The appeal should include a detailed explanation of the concerns and any new evidence or revisions. The editorial board will review the appeal and make a final decision.

1.8 Ethical Considerations:

• The peer review process adheres to ethical guidelines, including the avoidance of plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification of data.
• Reviewers are expected to disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves if they have a potential bias.

2. Reviewer Guidelines

2.1 Responsibilities:

• Reviewers are expected to provide a timely, thorough, and objective evaluation of the manuscript.
• Constructive feedback should be provided to help authors improve their work.

2.2 Conflicts of Interest:

• Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their evaluation of the manuscript.

2.3 Confidentiality:

• Reviewers must treat all manuscripts and associated materials as confidential and avoid discussing them with others.

By adhering to this peer review policy, Breathing Academia Journal ensures the integrity and quality of its published research, upholding the standards of academic excellence and contributing to the advancement of knowledge across disciplines.