Peer Review Policy

Next Gen World Reviews (NGWR) follows a double-blind peer review process to uphold rigorous scholarly standards. In this model, the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential to minimize bias.

Review Process

  1. Initial Screening
    All submissions are first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor to ensure fit with the journal’s aims and scope, originality, and compliance with formatting and ethical guidelines.

  2. Plagiarism Check
    Manuscripts are screened for similarity using Turnitin/iThenticate (or an equivalent tool). Submissions with significant overlap may be returned or rejected in line with the journal’s ethics policies.

  3. Double-Blind Peer Review
    • Each manuscript is sent to at least two independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.
    • Reviewers evaluate the clarity of the question, quality of the synthesis/methodology, significance of insights, completeness of evidence, and transparency of limitations.
    • Anonymous reviewer comments and recommendations are shared with authors; author and reviewer identities remain concealed throughout.

  4. Editorial Decision
    Based on reviewer feedback and the editors’ assessment, one of the following decisions is issued: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Authors receive consolidated guidance on revisions where applicable.

Timeline

The average time from submission to first decision is 15 days. The total time to final decision and publication can vary depending on the number and extent of revisions required.

Reviewer Ethics

Reviewers must:
• Maintain strict confidentiality and not share or use any manuscript content for personal advantage.
• Declare any conflicts of interest (financial, professional, or personal) and recuse themselves if a conflict exists.
• Provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based feedback within the agreed timeline.

Editorial Ethics and Conflicts of Interest

Editors handle submissions impartially and recuse themselves from decisions where conflicts exist. NGWR follows COPE-aligned practices for integrity, transparency, and the fair handling of ethical concerns.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by writing to ⟨journal email⟩ with a reasoned justification referencing specific reviewer/editor points. Appeals are evaluated by a senior editor not involved in the original decision. Complaints about editorial process or reviewer conduct are investigated in line with the journal’s ethics policy.

How to Submit

Before submitting, review the Author Guidelines and Publication Ethics pages to ensure compliance with formatting, transparency, and citation standards.
Submission portal: ngenpub.com/index.php/ngwr/about/submissions