Peer Review Policy

All manuscripts submitted to Kavya Setu follow a systematic peer-review process as outlined below:

Step 1: Initial Screening

• Upon submission, the editorial team conducts a preliminary review to check:
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope
  • Plagiarism (≤10% allowed, as per policy)
  • Basic structure, formatting, and language clarity
  • Compliance with ethical standards
• Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria are desk-rejected or sent back for revision before further processing.

Step 2: Assignment to Reviewers

• The Editor-in-Chief assigns each manuscript to two independent experts in the field for double-blind peer review (where neither the author nor the reviewers know each other’s identity).
• Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, academic credentials, and past peer-review experience.

Step 3: Review and Evaluation

• Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:
  ✔ Originality and significance of research
  ✔ Clarity of objectives and methodology
  ✔ Accuracy of data analysis and results
  ✔ Relevance of literature review and references
  ✔ Ethical compliance
  ✔ Overall contribution to the field
• Reviewers provide detailed comments and recommendations for improvement.

Step 4: Decision Making

Based on the reviewers' feedback, the editor makes one of the following decisions:
Accept (with minor or no revisions) – The manuscript is ready for publication.
Revise and Resubmit – Authors must incorporate suggested revisions and resubmit.
Reject – The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or scope.

The average peer-review process takes 4-6 weeks from submission to final decision.

Step 5: Revision and Final Acceptance

• Authors are given a specified time frame to revise their manuscript and address reviewer comments.
• Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated by the editorial board, and if necessary, sent back to the reviewers for final approval.
• Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes final editing, formatting, and proofreading before publication.

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the integrity of academic publishing. They are expected to:
✔ Provide constructive and unbiased feedback.
✔ Maintain confidentiality of the manuscript.
✔ Identify plagiarism, ethical violations, or conflicts of interest.
✔ Suggest improvements in clarity, structure, and validity of research.

4. Editorial Decision and Appeals

• The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, considering reviewers' feedback.
• If authors disagree with a review decision, they may submit a formal appeal with justifications.
• Appeals are reviewed by the editorial board, and decisions are final.

5. Ethical Considerations in Peer Review

• Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors must not disclose any manuscript details.
• Plagiarism & Misconduct: Manuscripts suspected of plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research are rejected and reported.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts before accepting a review assignment.

6. Transparency & Continuous Improvement

• The journal regularly evaluates its peer-review policies to ensure fairness and efficiency.
• Feedback from authors and reviewers is welcomed to improve the review process.