Submission to Publication Workflow

Review Process

The International Journal of Multidisciplinary Open Research and Advancement (IJMORA) follows a structured editorial and peer review workflow designed to ensure scientific quality, publication ethics, research integrity, and fair evaluation of submitted manuscripts. Every submission is assessed through multiple stages before a final publication decision is made.

1 Submission

2 Technical Screening

3 Editorial Assessment

4 Reviewer Assignment

5 Peer Review

6 Revision

7 Final Decision

Quality Evaluation

All manuscripts are evaluated for originality, relevance, methodology, ethics, scientific quality, and contribution to knowledge.

Independent Review

Editors may seek independent expert opinions before making publication decisions.

Ethics Screening

Submissions may be checked for plagiarism, ethical compliance, authorship accuracy, and publication integrity.

Transparent Decisions

Editorial decisions are based on evidence, reviewer feedback, journal scope, and scientific merit.

Step 1: Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the IJMORA online submission system. During submission, authors provide article metadata, author information, affiliations, abstracts, keywords, declarations, manuscript files, supplementary materials, and cover letters where required.

Submission confirmation does not indicate acceptance, peer review, or publication.

Step 2: Technical Screening

The Managing Team performs an initial technical review to verify that the manuscript is complete and suitable for editorial evaluation.

File completeness check.
Metadata verification.
Formatting review.
Ethics declaration check.
Similarity screening.
AI-risk indicators.
Reference quality assessment.
Figure and table review.

Manuscripts may be returned for correction before editorial assessment if substantial technical issues are identified.

Step 3: Editorial Assessment

Editors assess scope, novelty, originality, methodology, scientific quality, ethical considerations, and suitability for peer review.

At this stage, a manuscript may be rejected without external review if it is outside the journal scope, lacks scientific merit, contains serious ethical concerns, or fails to meet minimum quality standards.

Step 4: Reviewer Assignment

Editors identify reviewers with relevant expertise and no obvious conflict of interest. Author-suggested reviewers may be considered but are not guaranteed.

Reviewer selection is based on subject expertise, publication experience, independence, availability, and suitability for the manuscript topic.

Step 5: Peer Review

Reviewers evaluate originality, methodology, validity of data, interpretation of results, references, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.

Scientific quality.
Methodological soundness.
Data reliability.
Research significance.
Ethical compliance.
Presentation quality.
Reference accuracy.
Contribution to knowledge.

Reviewer recommendations assist editorial decision-making but do not determine the final outcome.

Step 6: Author Revision

When revisions are requested, authors must respond to reviewer comments and editorial recommendations. A response-to-reviewers document should explain modifications point-by-point.

Revised manuscripts may be evaluated directly by editors or returned to reviewers for further assessment.

Step 7: Final Editorial Decision

After considering reviewer comments, author responses, manuscript quality, ethical issues, and journal requirements, editors make the final decision.

Accept.
Minor Revision.
Major Revision.
Reject.
Withdraw for investigation.

Production and Publication

Accepted manuscripts enter production, which may include copyediting, metadata preparation, proof generation, author proof review, final quality checks, DOI assignment, publication scheduling, indexing preparation, and online publication.

Typical Decision Types

Desk Reject
Send to Review
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Accept
Reject

Final editorial decisions are based on scientific quality, originality, ethical compliance, reviewer feedback, and journal scope. APC status, waiver eligibility, institutional affiliation, nationality, or promotional programs do not influence editorial decisions.

Final Review Process Statement

The IJMORA review process is designed to support rigorous scholarly evaluation, protect research integrity, improve manuscript quality, and ensure that published articles contribute meaningfully to scientific and academic knowledge.