Reviewer Guidelines

Mebadi International Journal of Philosophy employs a double-anonymized anonymous peer review process to ensure the highest academic integrity and objectivity standards. In this model, both the identities of authors and reviewers remain concealed throughout the review process.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate submissions impartially, based solely on scholarly merit, and to maintain strict confidentiality concerning all materials under review.

Reviewers must refrain from assessing manuscripts if they have any potential conflicts of interest—academic, institutional, financial, or personal—with the author(s). In such cases, reviewers must promptly notify the editorial office and recuse themselves from the review process.

The Editor-in-Chief oversees the impartial evaluation of all submissions, ensuring that articles are assessed without regard to the author's ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religious beliefs, or political views. Per the journal's double-anonymized anonymous policy, every manuscript is subjected to a fair and unbiased review.

At least two national or international experts in the relevant field review each submission. The editor-in-chief makes the final decision regarding publication based on the reviewers' evaluations, the authors' revisions (if applicable), and the outcome of the review process.

Reviewers must treat all information related to submitted manuscripts as strictly confidential and not share, discuss, or disclose any details with third parties. If reviewers identify any instances of plagiarism or copyright infringement, they must report these concerns directly to the editor.

Should a reviewer feel unqualified to assess the content of a manuscript or be unable to provide a timely review, they are expected to inform the editor without delay and withdraw from the review process.