The Global Journal of Multidisciplinary and Applied Sciences (GJMAS) follows a rigorous, transparent, and ethical peer-review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and scientifically sound research. As an open-access, peer-reviewed journal, GJMAS is committed to timely, unbiased, confidential, and objective manuscript evaluation in accordance with internationally recognized standards of publication ethics, including the principles promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Step-by-Step Review Process

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system and are required to ensure compliance with the journal's author guidelines, formatting requirements, ethical standards, and publication policies.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial assessment by the editorial team to determine:

✔ Scope: Relevance to the aims and scope of GJMAS.

✔ Originality: Novelty and contribution to the relevant field.

✔ Formatting & Compliance: Compliance with the journal's submission and manuscript preparation requirements.

✔ Plagiarism Screening: Manuscripts may be checked using plagiarism detection software or equivalent screening tools.

✔ Ethical Compliance: Compliance with applicable research and publication ethics requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or rejected at the editorial screening stage.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening are sent for double-blind peer review.

• Manuscripts are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.
• Reviewers remain anonymous to the authors, and authors remain anonymous to the reviewers during the review process.
• Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

✔ Scientific Rigor: Research methodology, data analysis, results, and interpretation.

✔ Originality & Significance: Novelty, relevance, and potential contribution to the field.

✔ Clarity & Organization: Quality of presentation, structure, language, and logical coherence.

✔ References & Citation Integrity: Appropriate use and accuracy of relevant scholarly sources.

✔ Ethical Compliance: Compliance with applicable ethical requirements and responsible research practices.

Reviewers provide constructive and detailed comments and may recommend:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

4. Editorial Decision

The editor-in-chief or designated handling editor evaluates the reviewers' reports and makes an editorial decision.

• Accept: The manuscript meets the journal's scientific, editorial, and ethical standards.
• Minor Revision: Limited changes are required before final consideration.
• Major Revision: Substantial revisions are required, and the manuscript may undergo another round of peer review.
• Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's scientific, ethical, originality, or scope requirements.

The corresponding author receives the editorial decision together with the relevant reviewer comments.

5. Revision & Resubmission

When revisions are requested, authors must revise the manuscript carefully and provide a point-by-point response explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or other qualified reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

6. Final Decision & Publication

The editor-in-chief has final responsibility for the editorial decision regarding acceptance or rejection.

Accepted manuscripts proceed through the appropriate copyediting, proofreading, production, and publication stages before being published online.

Commitment to Ethical Review

✔ Confidentiality: Manuscripts and reviewer reports are treated as confidential throughout the review process.

✔ Fair & Unbiased Evaluation: Editorial and peer-review decisions are based on the academic quality, originality, significance, and methodological soundness of the manuscript.

✔ Reviewer Integrity: Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality, provide objective assessments, and disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their judgment.

✔ Editorial Independence: Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial or financial considerations.

✔ Timely Review: GJMAS aims to conduct the peer-review process as efficiently as possible, subject to reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and timely responses from authors.

Reviewer and Author Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts are original, accurate, ethically conducted, and not simultaneously submitted to another journal.

Reviewers are responsible for providing professional, evidence-based, constructive, and confidential assessments and must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal or professional advantage.

GJMAS is committed to maintaining high standards of peer-review integrity, editorial independence, research integrity, and publication ethics throughout the manuscript evaluation and publication process.