Peer Review Process

The Forum for University Scholars in Interdisciplinary Opportunities and Networking Conference adheres to a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality and integrity of all submissions. The journal follows a double-blind peer review system, meaning that both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the process. The steps involved are as follows:

1. Submission

  • Manuscripts are submitted through the journal's online submission system. Upon submission, the editorial office checks the manuscript to ensure compliance with submission guidelines and scope.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

  • The editorial team conducts an initial assessment of the manuscript to determine if it meets the basic standards of quality, originality, and relevance to the journal’s focus. Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria may be returned to the authors without peer review.

3. Reviewer Selection

  • Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers in the field relevant to the manuscript’s subject matter.
  • Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, research experience, and availability. Conflicts of interest are avoided by ensuring that reviewers have no affiliations or connections with the authors.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review

  • Reviewers receive anonymized manuscripts and are asked to assess the submission based on various criteria, including originality, clarity, methodological rigor, ethical soundness, and contribution to the field.
  • Reviewers provide detailed feedback and recommendations to the editorial team. They may suggest one of the following outcomes:
    • Accept
    • Minor Revisions
    • Major Revisions
    • Reject

5. Author Revisions

  • If revisions are required, the authors are given an opportunity to address the reviewers' comments and resubmit the revised manuscript.
  • The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation or assessed by the editorial team for final approval.

6. Final Decision

  • The editorial team makes the final decision based on the reviewers’ recommendations and the quality of the revisions. The possible decisions are:
    • Accepted for publication
    • Request for further revisions
    • Rejected

7. Publication

  • Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to the copyediting and proofreading stages before final publication. Authors will be informed of the expected publication timeline.

8. Reviewer Acknowledgment

  • Reviewers’ contributions are recognized in the journal, although their identities remain confidential. They play a critical role in maintaining the journal’s academic standards and integrity.