MAAREF UNIVERSITY PRESS
Peer Review Policy
Books and edited volumes: at least two independent external subject specialists assess the full proposal or manuscript, as appropriate. Individual scholarly chapters and conference papers: at least two independent assessments before acceptance. Editorial introductions, interviews, opinion pieces and other nonresearch material may receive editorial review and are labelled by type. Double anonymous review is preferred where feasible; the editor may use single anonymous or open review with documented reasons and contributor consent.
An editor selects reviewers for expertise, independence, availability and methodological fit, checks affiliations, coauthorship, supervision, financial ties and declared conflicts, and replaces conflicted reviewers. Reviewers assess originality, methods or argument, evidence, ethics, literature, clarity, relevance and permissions. An editor issues accept, minor revision, major revision, resubmit for review or reject with reasons. Revised work includes a point by point response; substantive changes return to independent reviewers. Authors may appeal within 30 days with a reasoned statement; an unconflicted senior editor reviews the process, and the Press gives a final reasoned outcome. Complaints follow the Complaints and Appeals policy. Published errors can lead to correction, expression of concern or retraction. AI tools cannot serve as reviewers or receive confidential manuscripts; disclosed assistance never replaces human accountability. Editors decide independently, reviewers advise independently, and the publisher maintains records and process oversight without dictating scholarly conclusions.
An editor selects reviewers for expertise, independence, availability and methodological fit, checks affiliations, coauthorship, supervision, financial ties and declared conflicts, and replaces conflicted reviewers. Reviewers assess originality, methods or argument, evidence, ethics, literature, clarity, relevance and permissions. An editor issues accept, minor revision, major revision, resubmit for review or reject with reasons. Revised work includes a point by point response; substantive changes return to independent reviewers. Authors may appeal within 30 days with a reasoned statement; an unconflicted senior editor reviews the process, and the Press gives a final reasoned outcome. Complaints follow the Complaints and Appeals policy. Published errors can lead to correction, expression of concern or retraction. AI tools cannot serve as reviewers or receive confidential manuscripts; disclosed assistance never replaces human accountability. Editors decide independently, reviewers advise independently, and the publisher maintains records and process oversight without dictating scholarly conclusions.