|
|
|
|
Golestan-e Honar- The process of receiving and reviewing articles
|
The Process of receiving and reviewing articles
|
|
| Restore images and colors | Post date: 2026/01/28 | |
Familiarity with the Process of Submission, Peer Review, and Publication
in Golestān-e Honar Biannual Academic Journal
Decision-Making Process
Once a manuscript is submitted to Golestān-e Honar, it is first reviewed by the managing editor. If there are any deficiencies in the submission, the manuscript will be returned to the author(s) for corrections. If the submission meets all the necessary requirements and formatting guidelines, the manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the journal’s editor-in-chief. At this stage, if the editor determines that the manuscript does not meet the minimum academic standards or is not aligned with the thematic scope of the journal, it will be rejected outright. Otherwise, it will be forwarded to the editorial board for further consideration. The board members and editor-in-chief review the abstract and the overall content of the manuscript to assess its relevance and suitability for the journal.
It is important to note, as stated in the Ministry of Science’s regulations, that the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript lies with the editorial board. In rare cases where the reviewers’ opinions may not align with the final judgment of the board, the editorial board retains the authority to make the ultimate decision after the peer review and revision process is completed.
Peer Review
Once reviewers are assigned, the manuscript is sent to them through the journal's website. Reviewers are given four weeks (one month) to evaluate the manuscript and submit their comments and evaluations through the journal’s online system. To maintain transparency and efficiency while upholding academic standards, Golestān-e Honar sends up to two reminder notices to the reviewers. If no response is received after these reminders, the review assignment is canceled, and the manuscript is reassigned to another reviewer, who is also given a minimum of one month to complete the review.
Once the reviewers submit their evaluations, if both reviewers recommend rejection, the manuscript will be formally declined, and the authors will be notified via the journal’s website. It is uncommon for a manuscript to be accepted without any comments or required revisions. If the reviewers provide conflicting evaluations, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer for a deciding opinion. This process explains why peer review may sometimes take between two to six months.
Revisions
The reviewers' comments and suggestions are communicated to the author(s) via the journal’s website. Authors are responsible for addressing the comments and uploading a revised version of the manuscript. The revised manuscript is then re-evaluated by the original reviewers. If the reviewers confirm that the necessary revisions have been made and deem the manuscript suitable for publication, and the editor-in-chief also approves it, the manuscript will be scheduled for publication. If the revisions are not deemed satisfactory, the authors will be informed, and the revision process will need to be repeated.
Publication
The publication phase is a separate process that requires full cooperation from the author(s) with the journal’s production team. Adherence to the journal’s style guide, citation rules, and formatting guidelines is essential. Authors are expected to carefully follow all instructions during the publication process and collaborate fully with the editorial staff. Please note that payment of the review fee is mandatory before a manuscript can be accepted and published.
Overview of the process from receiving to publishing articles
|
|
|
| |