Peer review

All submissions to the International Journal of Body, Mind and Culture (IJBMC) undergo editorial assessment and peer review in accordance with the journal’s standards of scholarly quality, ethical integrity, and relevance to scope.

Peer Review Model

IJBMC uses a double-anonymized peer review process. Authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another throughout the review process.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first assessed by the editorial office and the handling editor to determine whether they:

  • fall within the scope of the journal;
  • meet basic standards of scholarly quality and clarity;
  • comply with the journal’s submission requirements;
  • include the necessary ethical and disclosure statements;
  • are suitable for external peer review.

At this stage, manuscripts may be returned to the authors for technical correction or may be rejected without external review if they are outside the journal’s scope or do not meet the minimum standards for peer review.

External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass initial editorial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area.

Reviewers are invited to evaluate manuscripts on the basis of:

  • originality and scholarly contribution;
  • relevance to the journal’s aims and scope;
  • methodological rigor and validity;
  • ethical compliance;
  • clarity of presentation;
  • appropriate use of literature and references;
  • soundness of interpretation and conclusions.

Authors may suggest potential reviewers; however, the final selection of reviewers is made solely by the editors.

Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewer reports and editorial evaluation, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

  • accept;
  • minor revision;
  • major revision;
  • reject.

Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account the recommendations of reviewers and handling editors.

Revision Process

When revision is invited, authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript together with a clear, point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed further by the editors, depending on the nature of the revisions.

Research Integrity, Plagiarism, and Ethical Compliance

All submissions may be assessed using plagiarism-detection or similarity-checking tools. Manuscripts must comply with the journal’s ethical standards, including requirements relating to research ethics approval, informed consent, authorship, conflict of interest, and originality.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers are expected to treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors should declare any conflict of interest that may affect their ability to provide an objective assessment.

Appeals

Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may submit a reasoned written appeal to the editorial office. Appeals are considered at the discretion of the journal and may be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, where appropriate, additional editorial advisers.

After Acceptance

Accepted manuscripts undergo editorial preparation, which may include language editing, copyediting, formatting, and final author approval before publication.