Review Process

ARC Publication employs a peer review process that is both structured as well as transparent, designed to uphold the academic rigour, originality, and ethical standards of every article it publishes. Each submission is subjected to this peer review process before acceptance; no manuscript is published without first being evaluated by independent experts in the relevant field.

Review Process Flow

  • Manuscript Submission

    Authors submit their manuscripts via the journal's designated submission platform, ensuring compliance with the journal's scope, formatting specifications, and ethical guidelines.

  • Preliminary Editorial Evaluation

    The editorial office performs an initial screening to confirm originality, relevance, linguistic precision, ethical adherence, and conformity to submission protocols. Manuscripts failing to satisfy these criteria may be returned for correction or declined at this stage.

  • Assignment to Peer Reviewers

    Manuscripts passing the initial evaluation are assigned to one or more independent reviewers who exhibit expertise in the relevant subject area.

  • Peer Review Evaluation

    Reviewers critically assess the manuscript based on academic merit, research methodology, clarity of presentation, originality, and contribution to the field. Authors are encouraged to present their work clearly, as overly complex or poorly structured writing may reduce the impact of the research. Supporting materials not essential to the main discussion, such as extensive derivations or calculations, should be included as appendices.

  • Editorial Decision

    After considering the reviewers’ recommendations, the editor communicates the manuscript status to the authors. Possible decisions include:

    • Acceptance without revision
    • Acceptance with minor revisions (no further review required)
    • Acceptance subject to major revisions and additional review
    • Rejection

  • Revision and Author Response

    Reviewer comments are passed on with the authors to assist in improving the manuscript. Authors must submit a revised version along with a clear response clarifying how each comment has been addressed or providing explanation where modifications are not made.

  • Final Evaluation and Acceptance

    The editor (and reviewers, if necessary) evaluates the revised work to ensure all concerns have been adequately resolved.

  • Publication Scheduling

    Once approved, the manuscript is accepted for publication. Manuscripts that have been earlier published, copyrighted, or concurrently submitted anywhere else are not considered.

Review Principles and Timeline

The evaluation process is performed in a fair, unbiased, and confidential manner, ensuring equal opportunity for all the authors. Submission acceptance and publication decisions are based purely on scholarly merit and compliance with journal policies, without the application of additional or arbitrary criteria.

The editorial board is dedicated to a prompt and efficient review process while maintaining rigorous academic judgment. Under normal circumstances, the complete peer review process is completed within two week, without compromising publication quality.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for maintaining the academic integrity and consistency of the publication process, including final decisions on manuscript acceptance.