Reviewer Guidelines

The review process aims to evaluate the scholarly quality, originality, and relevance of a manuscript to the journal’s focus and scope, while providing constructive feedback to help authors improve their work and assisting editors in making informed publication decisions. Reviewers are expected to uphold ethical standards by offering objective and unbiased assessments, maintaining confidentiality, accepting assignments only within their areas of expertise, and declaring any potential conflicts of interest. In assessing a submission, reviewers consider its relevance to Islamic thought, its originality and scholarly contribution, the clarity of its research problem and objectives, the strength of its theoretical or conceptual foundation, and the appropriateness of its methodology or argumentative rigor. They also examine the depth and coherence of the analysis, the integration of previous research, and the overall structure, including essential components such as the abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, discussion, conclusion, and references. Language clarity, coherence, and adherence to the journal’s style guide are likewise evaluated. Based on these considerations, reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions requiring resubmission, or rejection. Reviews may be provided through annotated manuscripts or the journal’s review form, with feedback expected to be constructive and focused on scholarly merit. The ideal review timeline is 2–4 weeks, and reviewers unable to meet this deadline should promptly notify the editors.