Peer Review Process

AN-NASYI'IN applies a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of all published manuscripts.

Review Model

The journal employs a Double-Blind Peer Review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. This approach ensures an objective, fair, and unbiased evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

Review Workflow

1. Initial Screening

The editorial team evaluates the manuscript's relevance, formatting, and compliance with the journal's scope and submission guidelines.

2. Similarity Check

The manuscript undergoes plagiarism screening using similarity detection software to ensure originality.

3. Double-Blind Review

At least two independent reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on academic quality, methodology, originality, and contribution.

4. Revision

Authors revise their manuscripts in accordance with reviewer comments and editorial recommendations.

5. Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on reviewer reports and editorial evaluation.

6. Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading, layout editing, DOI assignment, and publication.

Estimated Timeline

Initial Editorial Screening	1–2 Weeks
Peer Review Process	4–8 Weeks
Revision Stage	2–4 Weeks
Final Editorial Decision	1 Week

Review Integrity

AN-NASYI'IN is committed to maintaining a transparent, fair, and ethical peer review process. Editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal's scope.