Peer Review Policy and Evaluation Procedures

 

To ensure the publication of high-quality, objective, accurate, and ethically sound scholarly work, the Journal of the Faculty of Arts and Media – University of Misurata adopts a Double-Blind Peer Review system, as stipulated in the journal's internal regulations. Submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening to verify their compliance with the journal’s publication standards, including the required similarity threshold of no more than 20%. Manuscripts that meet the requirements proceed through the following peer review process:

  1. Selection of Reviewers
  • The editorial board removes all identifying information of the authors before sending the manuscript for review.
  • Reviewers are selected both from within Libya and internationally, based on their academic competence and integrity.
  • A reviewer must hold an academic qualification higher than that of the submitting author.
  1. Review and Evaluation Process
  • Manuscripts are sent to reviewers along with the official evaluation form and guidelines, based on the journal’s approved assessment criteria.
  • The manuscript is graded out of 100 points, distributed as follows:
    • Topic significance: 10 points
    • Methodology and approach: 30 points
    • Use of sources and references: 10 points
    • Scientific contribution: 20 points
    • Analysis, results, and recommendations: 20 points
    • Formal, organizational, and linguistic aspects: 10 points
  • Reviewers assess manuscripts objectively and provide written feedback using the forms prepared by the editorial board.
  • Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality and evaluate the work impartially and scientifically (objectively and formally).
  • Evaluation outcomes are classified as follows:
    • Accepted for publication
    • Accepted with revisions
    • Rejected
  • A manuscript is only accepted for publication if it scores at least 65 out of 100.
  • The standard review period is fifteen (15) days from the date the reviewer receives the manuscript. If the reviewer fails to submit the evaluation within the allotted time, the editorial board reserves the right to disregard the review, forfeit any reviewer compensation, and assign the manuscript to another reviewer.
  1. Revision and Dispute Resolution
  • If a manuscript is deemed acceptable with revisions, it is returned to the author along with the reviewers' comments. Authors are expected to respond to comments or provide a scientifically justified rebuttal.
  • In cases where reviewer opinions are significantly divergent or in dispute with the author's response, the manuscript is referred to a third reviewer for a final decision.
  • The editorial board retains the final authority on all publication decisions.
  1. Confidentiality and Ethics
  • All evaluations are strictly confidential, and the editorial board is committed to maintaining this confidentiality.
  • The journal upholds the highest standards of publication ethics, ensuring:
    • Confidentiality throughout the review process.
    • No conflict of interest on the part of reviewers.
    • Authors must implement all reviewer-recommended revisions approved by the editorial board.