Transparency and rigor are cornerstones of Naman's Hub. Follow the journey your manuscript takes through our [Specify: e.g., Double-Blind / Single-Blind / Open] peer review process, designed to ensure scholarly excellence.
Your journey begins! Submit your manuscript and accompanying files through our dedicated online portal [Link/details]. You'll receive an immediate confirmation with your unique manuscript ID.
Confirmation: InstantOur editorial team conducts essential preliminary checks:
Manuscripts not meeting these standards may be returned promptly (desk reject).
Typical Timeframe: 3-7 DaysSuitable manuscripts are assigned to an Associate Editor with expertise matching your research area. They will oversee the entire peer review process for your submission.
Typical Timeframe: 2-5 Days (after triage)The assigned Editor identifies and invites qualified, independent experts (usually 2-3) to review your manuscript. Reviewer selection considers:
Reviewers rigorously evaluate the manuscript's originality, methodology, significance, clarity, and ethical soundness. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations to the Editor.
Our process is [Specify: e.g., Double-Blind], meaning reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other.
Typical Timeframe: 3-6 Weeks (from reviewer acceptance)The Editor synthesizes reviewer feedback and their own assessment to make an initial decision:
You'll receive the decision along with anonymized reviewer comments.
Target First Decision: 6-10 Weeks (from submission)If revisions are requested, carefully address all editor and reviewer comments. Submit your revised manuscript along with a detailed point-by-point response letter within the provided timeframe.
Revision Time: Typically 2-6 Weeks (depending on extent)The Editor evaluates the revised manuscript and responses. Additional review rounds may occur if needed. Once satisfied, the Editor issues the final acceptance notification.
Congratulations! Your accepted manuscript moves to production (copyediting, typesetting, proofing).
Final Decision: Varies based on revision roundsPeer review is a vital collaborative effort. We support our reviewers by:
We are immensely grateful for the expertise and dedication of our reviewer community.