Peer Review Policy

Publication of articles in Nurani is dependent solely on scientific validity and coherence as judged by our editors and/or peer reviewers, who will also assess whether the writing is comprehensible and whether the work represents a useful contribution to the field. Nurani acknowledged the effort and suggestions made by its reviewers. 

Type of peer review

Review process employs a double blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa.

Review reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original by stating the objectives and gap clearly
  • Is methodologically sound
  • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
  • Has results/findings which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
  • Correctly references previous relevant work
  • Reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.

Decision

Reviewers advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. The Editors will reach a decision based on these reports and, where necessary, they will consult with members of the Editorial Board. Editor?s decision is final.

Becoming a Reviewer

If you are not currently a reviewer for Nurani, but would like to be added to the list of reviewers, please contact us. The benefits of reviewing for Nurani include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in related research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in our list of reviewers. You may also be able to cite your work for Nurani as part of your professional development requirements.