Editorial and Peer Review Policy

At Synthesis: A Multidisciplinary Research Journal, we are committed to upholding the highest standards of editorial integrity, transparency, and scholarly rigor. Our editorial and peer review process ensures that published research meets the journal’s interdisciplinary focus and adheres to internationally recognized ethical and academic standards.

Peer Review Process

• The journal operates under a double-blind peer review system, in which both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous. This approach ensures impartial and unbiased evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

• All submitted manuscripts undergo initial screening by the editorial team to assess their relevance to the journal’s aims, scope, and quality standards.

• Submissions deemed suitable are then sent to a minimum of two qualified reviewers with expertise in the relevant fields.

• Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, evidence-based feedback within a standard review period of 2 to 4 weeks, although timelines may vary based on the complexity of the manuscript.

Editorial Responsibility and Conflict of Interest

• Editors and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest—financial, personal, or professional—that may influence their assessment of a manuscript.

• In such cases, an alternative editor or reviewer will be assigned to maintain the integrity of the process.

• Editors make the final decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection based on the reviewers' recommendations and the manuscript’s scholarly merit.

Desk Rejection Policy

• Manuscripts may be desk-rejected without external review if they:

  • Do not align with the journal’s multidisciplinary scope;

  • Fail to meet basic scholarly standards;

  • Lack originality or sufficient methodological rigor.

This process allows the journal to maintain academic excellence and ensures that reviewers’ time and expertise are respected.