Umm Al-Qura University journals implement a double-blind peer review process (wherein the identities of both authors and reviewers remain mutually undisclosed) to ensure academic originality, maintain scholarly excellence, and uphold ethical publishing standards.
Peer reviewers play a pivotal role in safeguarding the quality and credibility of our journals. The Editorial Board profoundly values their academic expertise and scholarly contributions.
Review Invitation
Each manuscript is assigned to a minimum of three reviewers, selected either from our roster of volunteer reviewers or upon the recommendation of the handling editorial board member during the initial assessment. The reviewer’s primary objective is to evaluate the scholarly caliber of the manuscript and provide a well-founded recommendation regarding its suitability for publication, categorized as acceptance, revision, or rejection.
Invited reviewers are expected to:
Promptly respond to the review invitation—either accepting or declining—after examining the manuscript’s title and abstract.
Request an extension well in advance if additional time is required, thereby ensuring a thorough and comprehensive evaluation.
Objectives
Safeguard academic rigor and ensure clarity of scholarly exposition.
Assess the significance, originality, and intellectual contribution of the manuscript.
Support the Editorial Board in reaching well-informed editorial decisions.
Provide authors with constructive, professional, and actionable feedback.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Maintain strict confidentiality and absolute impartiality throughout the review process.
Promptly disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest.
Evaluate the manuscript objectively, substantiating comments with sound scholarly evidence.
Adhere strictly to designated review deadlines.
Refrain from utilizing, sharing, or referencing any unpublished content from the manuscript.
Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts according to the following benchmarks:
Relevance to the journal’s scope and its target audience.
Originality of the research and its tangible contribution to the discipline.
Methodological soundness and research design.
Coherence, structural organization, and academic style.
Adequacy, precision, and accuracy of citations and references.
Compliance with international ethical standards in academic publishing.
Format of the Review Report
The review report should comprise the following sections:
General overview and overall assessment of the manuscript.
Detailed line-by-line, paragraph-level, or section-specific comments.
A definitive publication recommendation:
Accept (with minor revisions)
Revise and Resubmit (major revisions subject to re-evaluation)
Reject (final decline; resubmission not encouraged)
Confidential comments to the handling editor (where applicable).
Constructive and professional remarks addressed to the author(s).
Ethical Considerations
Maintain an objective, equitable, and unbiased scholarly perspective.
Uphold total confidentiality regarding manuscript materials; do not duplicate, distribute, or retain copies.
Promptly notify the Editorial Board of any suspected ethical breaches, including plagiarism or data falsification.
Refrain from requesting self-citations to one's own scholarly works unless directly relevant and essential to the study.
Inquiries and Support
For inquiries regarding the peer review process or to request an extension of the submission deadline, please contact the Editorial Office via email at: