Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

           PAKISTAN ISLAMICUS is a Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Research Journal. All articles submitted to
           the journal are sent to the reviewer without the details of the author and his institution.

  • First Desk Review

Each paper goes through an first desk review by a relevant editorial board/ team member to determine whether it is properly formatted and follows publication ethics. The Managing Editor would also consider whether basic port research protocols have been followed in research design/analysis and contribution to the literature. At PAKISTAN ISLAMICUS proper desk review process has been employed where articles must go through a process of passing a desk rejection/acceptance system before sending to an expert in the field; papers that do not meet the basic requirements are not sent out for external review.

  • External Review

PAKISTAN ISLAMICUS follows a double-blind review process after a paper is screened through the internal review. Authors are requested not to include their personal information in the text of the paper. They are further indicated not to post their papers on any website to prevent their identity to potential reviewers. While reviewers are also expected to refuse if they come to know about the identification of the author(s) of a paper referred to them for peer review. External reviewers generally comment and suggest originality, quality of presentation, research design, data/results/conclusions, the usefulness of the study, and interest in the researcher's community. During an external review, if reviewers find that the research paper has major flaws that cannot be resolved through a major revision, they can recommend declining the paper.

Suggesting Reviewers
Following the HEC guidelines in letter and spirit, authors submitting their research papers to PAKISTAN ISLAMICUS are not allowed to suggest potential reviewers for reviewing their research papers. While authors may indicate those scholars (due to any real or perceived conflict of interest) to whom they feel unsuitable to serve as reviewers for their specific paper.

Criteria for Selection of Reviewers
Reviewers are selected carefully based on the following criteria:

  1. Must hold a PhD degree or advanced professional qualification with extensive professional/academic experience, i.e. CFA, CMA, etc.
  2. Recognized as a well-reputed expert in the field (having publications in reputable academic or professional research journals).
  3. Never coauthored a paper with the author(s).
  4. Not affiliated with the institution of author(s).
  5. Should have a good understanding of data analysis.

Resources Available to Reviewers
Reviewers of PAKISTAN ISLAMICUS are reputable academic and professional researchers who have access to a wide range of research-related databases and other latest material. It is also provided if reviewers need further material to complete their review.

Publication Ethics (for reviewers)
All reviewers are encouraged to follow the HEC guidelines for reviewers to meet their responsibilities regarding objectivity, promptness, conflict of interest, confidentiality, and reporting.

Steps in Peer Review Process
The peer review process can be broadly described as follows:


Steps of Review Process

Estimated Time


Submission of paper



First internal review *

3-4 weeks


External review

4-5 weeks


Communication of review reports to authors for minor/major revision **

1 week


Submission of the revised paper

4-8 weeks


Second internal review (to assess whether reviewers suggestions have been incorporated satisfactorily) ***

2-4 weeks


Acceptance of paper (on successful submission of revised paper)

1 week

* Paper is returned to authors if it does not meet the basic criteria.

** Paper is returned to authors if external reviewers find that the research paper has serious faults that cannot be resolved through a major revision.

*** Authors are requested for further revision if editors find that reviewers’ suggestions have not been incorporated satisfactorily.

Note: Authors are requested to revise the paper carefully to the reviewers’ suggestions to avoid unnecessary delay in the review process.

Resubmission of paper (after peer review)

Nearly every published paper goes through at least one revision. Authors should take a revision request as good news and an opportunity to learn and improve the quality of their research paper. They are directed to carefully revise the paper by the reviewers’ suggestions to avoid unnecessary interruption in the review process. Generally, when the review report is provided, each review point must either be incorporated in the revised version of the paper or an appropriate response is expected from the Author. Author(s) should be very careful regarding the accuracy and completeness of the reviewers’ suggested points to avoid further review and delay (further revision can be recommended if editors find that reviewers’ suggestions have not been incorporated satisfactorily).

Keeping in view the other academic/professional commitments, authors may request extra time if they feel that revision needs more effort and time to improve the quality of the paper.