Reviwers

Reviewer Statement

Intersecta Minds Journal upholds a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the highest quality of scholarship across the fields of Social Science, Arts and Humanities, Business, Management, and Education. All submitted manuscripts undergo evaluation by three independent expert reviewers, selected based on their scholarly expertise and research background. Reviewers assess originality, methodological soundness, academic contribution, clarity, and ethical integrity.

By participating in the review process, reviewers affirm their commitment to:

Providing fair, constructive, and timely feedback to authors.
Maintaining confidentiality in accordance with the double-blind review system.
Ensuring that personal biases, conflicts of interest, or competing academic interests do not influence their judgment.
Supporting the enhancement of academic quality, interdisciplinary discourse, and global perspectives.

Intersecta Minds Journal values the critical role of reviewers in fostering scholarly excellence, promoting ethical research, and contributing to the continuous advancement of knowledge.

Ethics of Authors

Authors submitting to Intersecta Minds Journal are expected to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity and responsible scholarship. Submissions must adhere to the following ethical expectations:

Originality and Integrity
Manuscripts must be original, unpublished works that are not under review elsewhere. Authors must avoid plagiarism, data fabrication, and unethical research practices.
Transparency and Accountability
All data, methods, findings, and interpretations must be presented transparently and accurately. Authors should acknowledge all sources, contributions, and funding where appropriate.
Authorship Responsibility
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant scholarly contributions. All authors must approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission.
Ethical Research Conduct
Studies involving human subjects, cultural materials, sensitive data, or community engagement must comply with ethical standards and obtain necessary approvals from relevant bodies.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence research outcomes or interpretations.
Responsiveness to Review
Authors are expected to engage constructively with peer review feedback and revise their manuscripts responsibly.

By adhering to these principles, authors contribute to a culture of trust, transparency, and excellence in scholarly communication.

Ethics of Reviewers (Double-Blind Review)

Intersecta Minds Journal adopts a strict double-blind peer-review system, ensuring that the identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following ethical standards:

Confidentiality
All materials received for review are confidential and must not be shared, discussed, or used for personal research or gain.
Objectivity and Impartiality
Reviews must be conducted objectively, without personal criticism. Assessments should be based solely on academic merit, methodological rigor, and relevance.
Conflict of Interest Avoidance
Reviewers must decline assignments where conflicts of interest—financial, academic, institutional, or personal—could compromise impartiality.
Timeliness and Professionalism
Reviewers should complete evaluations within the specified timeframe and communicate promptly if delays arise.
Constructive Feedback
Review comments should aim to improve the manuscript by offering clear, respectful, and actionable suggestions.

Through these ethical commitments, reviewers help maintain the journal’s integrity, credibility, and dedication to promoting high-quality interdisciplinary research.

Reviewer Expertise Requirements (Three Areas)

To ensure robust and comprehensive evaluation, Intersecta Minds Journal appoints reviewers who demonstrate expertise in three core areas relevant to their assigned manuscript:

1. Subject-Matter Expertise

Reviewers must possess demonstrated scholarly experience—publications, research, or academic qualifications—in the specific discipline or topic area of the manuscript (e.g., Sociology, Psychology, Education, Business, Arts, Humanities).

2. Methodological Competence

Reviewers should be proficient in the methodological approaches used in the manuscript, including qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, theoretical, or creative methodologies as appropriate.

3. Ethical and Scholarly Standards

Reviewers must be knowledgeable about academic ethics, publication protocols, international research standards, and responsible citation and evaluation practices.

This three-pillar expertise model ensures comprehensive, fair, and high-quality reviews aligned with the journal’s interdisciplinary mission.