Peer Review Process

The article is reviewed in a blind review by  external reviewers. The review is done for a maximum of 2 months. Every manuscript submitted to International Journal of Complex Systems Management and Interdisciplinary Studies (IJCS-MIS) is read by the editorial staff. Those manuscripts evaluated by editors to be inappropriate to journal criteria are rejected promptly without external review. Manuscripts evaluated to be of potential interest to our readership are sent to double blind reviewers. Every manuscript is independently reviewed by at least two reviewers in the form of "double-blind review". The editors then make a decision for publication based on the reviewer's recommendation from among several posibilities: Accept Submission, Revision Required, Resubmit for Review, and Decline Submission.

In certain cases, the editor may submit an article for review to another third reviewer before making a decision, if necessary.

The Editor-in-Chief of IJCS-MIS has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.

Review Process:

  1. Author submit the manuscript
  2. Editor Evaluation (some manuscripts are rejected or returned before the review process)
  3. Double-blind peer review process
  4. Editor decision
  5. Confirmation to the authors

After Acceptance

Corresponding authors will receive an e-mail with a link to log into our online proofing system, allowing annotation, correction, comment, and answer questions from the Copy Editor and upload your edits on the PDF version to the system. All instructions for proofing will be given in the e-mail we send to authors.

The Average Time for Review

  • The average time during which the preliminary assessment of manuscripts is conducted: 14 Days
  • The average time during which the reviews of manuscripts are conducted: 60 Days
  • The average time in which the article is published: 90 Days
Review Forms for Reviewer
  1. Originality: Does the study offer novel and significant contributions that justify its publication?

  2. Literature Review: Does the paper demonstrate a thorough grasp of key works in the field? Are relevant sources properly cited, and are there any major gaps or omissions?

  3. Methodological Rigor: Is the research based on a sound theoretical foundation or well-defined concepts? Is the methodology well-designed and appropriate for the study’s objectives?

  4. Findings & Analysis: Are the results presented clearly and interpreted effectively? Do the conclusions align logically with the evidence and discussion?

  5. Practical & Theoretical Impact: Does the paper clearly explain how its findings advance research, inform practice, or benefit society? Does it effectively link theory to real-world applications? What potential influence could the study have on policy, education, or public discourse? Are these implications well-supported by the results?

  6. Clarity & Presentation: Is the paper well-written, using discipline-appropriate language for the target audience? Are the arguments coherent and easy to follow?