Umm Al-Qura University journals adopt a double-blind peer review system—wherein the identities of both authors and reviewers remain mutually undisclosed—to ensure the authenticity and quality of research, as well as adherence to academic and ethical publishing standards.
The contribution of reviewers constitutes a fundamental cornerstone in maintaining the quality and credibility of the journals, and the Editorial Board holds their scholarly expertise and contributions in the highest regard.
Invitation to Review
Each manuscript is evaluated by a minimum of three peer reviewers, selected either from the roster of volunteer reviewers or upon the recommendation of the handling editorial board member during initial screening. The reviewer’s primary role is to assess the scholarly quality of the manuscript and provide a well-defined recommendation regarding its suitability for publication, whether through acceptance, revision, or rejection.
Invited reviewers are expected to adhere to the following:
Promptly respond to the review invitation by accepting or declining at the earliest convenience, after examining the manuscript's title and abstract.
Submit an early request for a deadline extension if additional time is required, ensuring a comprehensive and thorough evaluation.
Objectives
Ensure rigorous academic research quality and scholarly clarity.
Evaluate the significance, relevance, and originality of the manuscript.
Support the Editorial Board in reaching sound editorial decisions.
Provide constructive, professional feedback to authors.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Maintain complete confidentiality and absolute impartiality throughout the review process.
Disclose any potential conflicts of interest immediately.
Review manuscripts objectively and provide well-reasoned, evidence-based commentary.
Commit to submitting evaluations within the designated timeframe.
Refrain from utilizing, citing, or sharing any part of the manuscript’s content prior to publication.
Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
Relevance to the journal’s scope and its readership's academic interests.
Originality of the research and its contribution to the field of language or literature.
Soundness and rigor of the methodology and research design.
Coherence, structural organization, and overall clarity of the manuscript.
Adequacy of scholarly documentation and accuracy of citations and references.
Compliance with ethical research and publishing standards.
Review Report Format
The review report must incorporate the following elements:
General observations regarding the manuscript.
Detailed, section-by-section critiques (organized by paragraph, line, or section).
Clear, definitive recommendations:
Accept (with minor revisions)
Reject (with an invitation to resubmit following major revisions)
Reject (definitive rejection; resubmission not recommended)
Confidential comments directed to the handling Editor (where applicable).
Constructive, professional comments directed to the author(s).
Ethical Considerations
Maintain a fair, rigorous, and unbiased assessment at all times.
Uphold strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and avoid disclosing its contents.
Promptly alert the Editorial Board to any suspected ethical violations, including plagiarism, redundant publication, or data falsification.
Refrain from requesting self-citations of one’s own publications unless directly and indisputably relevant to the manuscript.
Communication and Support
For inquiries regarding the peer review process or to request a submission deadline extension, please contact the Editorial Office via email at: