Review Process

The International Journal for Research in Media & Communication (IJRMC) follows a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process in accordance with the principles and best practice guidelines recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal is committed to maintaining academic integrity, impartial evaluation, and the highest standards of scholarly publishing.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial office and the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned handling editor. This preliminary assessment determines whether the manuscript:

  • Falls within the journal’s aims and scope

  • Meets basic quality and formatting standards

  • Demonstrates sufficient academic merit

  • Complies with ethical and submission requirements

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage without external peer review.

Plagiarism and Ethical Screening

All submissions are subject to plagiarism detection and ethical evaluation. The journal strictly prohibits plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate submission, and unethical research practices.

If ethical concerns arise, the journal follows the established procedures recommended by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to investigate and resolve the issue.

Peer Review Model

IJRMC operates under a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process.

Each eligible manuscript is typically reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field of media and communication research. Reviewers evaluate submissions based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

The journal maintains a selective peer-review process to ensure the publication of high-quality and impactful research.

Revision Process

If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed response to the reviewers’ comments, explaining how each comment has been addressed.

For manuscripts requiring major revisions, the revised version may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

Final Decision

The final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the assigned handling editor.

Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial interests, institutional pressures, or external factors.

Transparency and Fairness

The journal ensures that:

  • Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scholarly merit

  • There is no discrimination based on race, gender, nationality, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs

  • Conflicts of interest are disclosed and managed appropriately

  • Confidentiality is maintained throughout the peer review process

Appeals and Complaints

Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may submit a reasoned appeal to the editorial office. Appeals will be reviewed objectively, and additional independent evaluation may be conducted where appropriate.

All ethical complaints and disputes are handled in accordance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).