Reviewer Management

Reviewer Management Policy

Overview
At Kashmir Journal of Academic Research and Development (KJARD), an effective and ethical reviewer management system is central to maintaining our commitment to academic excellence, scholarly integrity, and transparency. Our peer review framework ensures that every manuscript is evaluated rigorously, fairly, and in a timely manner by qualified professionals across the academic and development research community.

1. Reviewer Recruitment and Selection

  • Subject Expertise: Reviewers are selected based on expertise in social sciences, education, development studies, and interdisciplinary research. Selection considers:

    • Academic qualifications and research achievements

    • Peer-reviewed publication history

    • Familiarity with qualitative and quantitative methodologies

  • Diversity and Representation: KJARD promotes a diverse reviewer pool representing regions, institutions, genders, and academic stages to enrich perspectives and reduce bias.

  • Invitation to Review: Invitations include the abstract, review timeline (2–4 weeks), and conflict of interest disclosure instructions.

  • Reviewer Database: Continuously updated via literature searches, editorial recommendations, author referrals, and academic networks.

2. Reviewer Assignment Process

  • Double-Blind Review: Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous, ensuring impartiality.

  • Workload Distribution: Assignments are monitored to balance reviewer load.

  • Inclusivity: Both senior experts and early-career researchers are engaged to encourage mentorship.

3. Reviewer Expectations and Guidelines

  • Evaluation Criteria: Originality, academic rigor, relevance to knowledge advancement, ethical compliance.

  • Timeliness: Reviews due within 2–4 weeks.

  • Confidentiality: Manuscript details must not be shared or misused.

  • Ethical Responsibility: Report suspected plagiarism, data issues, or conflicts of interest.

4. Communication and Support

  • Editors provide guidance, technical support, and respond to reviewer queries.

  • Reviewers are recognized through acknowledgments, certificates, and editorial board opportunities.

5. Quality Assurance in Peer Review

  • Reviews assessed for depth, fairness, and timeliness.

  • Conflicting reviews may trigger additional review or editor’s decision.

  • Reviewer performance is periodically evaluated.

6. Reviewer Development and Incentives

  • Opportunities for training, mentorship, and webinars.

  • Incentives such as submission fee discounts, fast-tracked handling, and acknowledgments.

7. Managing Conflicts and Misconduct

  • Reviewers must disclose conflicts (financial, academic, or personal).

  • Misconduct (breach of confidentiality, misuse of data, biased commentary) may lead to removal and institutional notification.

Conclusion
KJARD’s reviewer management is built on fairness, professionalism, and scholarly responsibility. By cultivating a diverse and committed reviewer base, we ensure each article published reflects the highest standards of peer-reviewed academic research.