Peer Review Process

BHĀRATĀYANA | भारतायन | ভারতায়ন

AI-Assisted Interdisciplinary Journal of Indian Knowledge Systems

Commitment to Rigorous and Fair Peer Review

BHĀRATĀYANA is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly excellence through a rigorous, impartial, transparent, and ethically responsible peer-review process. Peer review is central to ensuring the originality, academic quality, methodological rigor, and intellectual contribution of every manuscript published in the journal.

The journal follows a double-anonymous peer-review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. This approach promotes fairness, minimizes bias, and encourages objective academic evaluation.

1. Editorial Screening

Upon submission, every manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment conducted by the Editorial Office.

The purpose of this screening is to determine whether the manuscript:

• falls within the journal's scope;

• complies with the Author Guidelines and formatting requirements;

• demonstrates sufficient scholarly quality for peer review;

• satisfies ethical and publication standards;

• contains all required declarations and supporting information.

Manuscripts that do not meet these preliminary requirements may be returned to the authors for technical revision or declined without external review.

2. Double-Anonymous Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening are assigned to independent experts for double-anonymous peer review.

Under this model:

• reviewers do not know the identity of the author(s);

• authors do not know the identity of the reviewers;

• all review reports remain confidential.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, research experience, and familiarity with the subject matter.

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts objectively and constructively, considering the following aspects:

• originality and novelty;

• relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;

• significance of the research problem;

• adequacy of the literature review;

• methodological soundness;

• quality of analysis and interpretation;

• coherence of arguments;

• academic writing and organization;

• ethical compliance;

• contribution to Indian Knowledge Systems and interdisciplinary scholarship.

Constructive recommendations for improvement are strongly encouraged.

4. Editorial Decision

After considering the reviewers' reports, the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board where appropriate, will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept

• Accept with Minor Revisions

• Major Revisions Required

• Reject

Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, ethical integrity, and relevance to the journal's scope.

The Editor-in-Chief retains final responsibility for all publication decisions.

5. Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors should:

• address each reviewer comment carefully and respectfully;

• revise the manuscript accordingly;

• submit a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed or, where applicable, provide a reasoned justification for any recommendation not adopted.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation where necessary.

6. Confidentiality

The peer-review process is conducted under strict confidentiality.

Reviewers, editors, and editorial staff must not:

• disclose manuscript contents;

• share unpublished data;

• use privileged information for personal advantage;

• communicate with authors outside the official editorial process.

All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential scholarly documents.

7. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

• provide fair, objective, and evidence-based evaluations;

• maintain confidentiality;

• declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment;

• complete reviews within the agreed timeframe;

• identify relevant literature that has not been cited;

• report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, ethical concerns, or other irregularities to the Editorial Office.

Reviewers should focus on the scholarly content of the manuscript and avoid personal criticism.

8. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring that the peer-review process is:

• impartial;

• independent;

• timely;

• confidential;

• free from discrimination and conflicts of interest.

Editors shall evaluate manuscripts solely on the basis of:

• academic quality;

• originality;

• methodological rigor;

• ethical compliance;

• relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

Editorial decisions shall not be influenced by nationality, ethnicity, gender, institutional affiliation, political opinion, or religious belief.

9. Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must decline participation in the review of any manuscript where a real or perceived conflict of interest exists.

Examples include:

• personal relationships;

• institutional affiliations;

• collaborative research;

• financial interests;

• competitive academic interests.

Where a conflict is identified, an alternative reviewer or editor will be assigned.

10. Ethical Oversight

The Editorial Board reserves the right to suspend or terminate the review process if credible evidence of publication misconduct is identified, including:

• plagiarism;

• duplicate submission;

• fabricated or falsified data;

• manipulated images;

• citation manipulation;

• undisclosed use of AI contrary to journal policy;

• other breaches of publication ethics.

Appropriate editorial action will be taken in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics Policy.

11. Quality Assurance

To maintain the highest editorial standards, BHĀRATĀYANA seeks to ensure that peer review is:

• academically rigorous;

• professionally respectful;

• transparent in principle;

• ethically responsible;

• constructive in feedback;

• consistent in editorial practice.

The journal periodically reviews its editorial procedures to strengthen quality assurance and promote continuous improvement.

12. Appeals

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a significant factual or procedural error may submit a written appeal to the Editorial Office.

Appeals must present clear academic grounds and supporting evidence.

All appeals are reviewed independently, and the final decision of the Editor-in-Chief shall be considered binding.

13. Commitment to Editorial Excellence

BHĀRATĀYANA recognizes peer review as an essential mechanism for safeguarding the integrity of scholarly communication. Through a fair, independent, and transparent review process, the journal aims to promote high-quality interdisciplinary research, encourage constructive academic dialogue, and contribute meaningfully to the advancement of Indian Knowledge Systems.

BHĀRATĀYANA | भारतायन | ভারতায়ন

Committed to scholarly excellence through rigorous peer review, editorial independence, ethical publishing, and responsible human–AI collaboration.