Peer review pOlicy

1. Policy Overview

Panchara employs a strict double-blind peer review process to ensure objective, high-quality, and unbiased evaluation of all submitted manuscripts. Under this policy:
The reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
The authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
Every submission is evaluated solely on its academic or literary merit, relevance, originality, and clarity, independent of the author’s race, gender, institutional affiliation, or standing.

2. The Review Process

Initial Screening: The Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial assessment for basic alignment with the magazine’s scope, formatting guidelines, and plagiarism standards. Rejections at this stage are finalized without peer review.
Anonymization: Once approved for review, the editorial office strips the manuscript of all identifying metadata, author names, acknowledgments, and institutional tracking details.
External Evaluation: The anonymized manuscript is sent to at least two independent expert reviewers specializing in the relevant field.

3. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and submit a detailed report alongside one of the following recommendations to the editorial board:
Accept without revisions: The manuscript is ready for publication.
Accept with minor revisions: The author must address minor stylistic or conceptual feedback before publication.
Major revisions required: The manuscript requires significant rewriting and must undergo a second round of peer review after resubmission.
Reject: The manuscript does not meet the necessary standards or scope of the magazine.
The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, based on the synthesis of reviewer feedback.

4. Author Guidelines for Ensuring Anonymity

To facilitate this process, authors must prepare their manuscripts to prevent accidental identification:
Remove author names, affiliations, and contact details from the main text, headers, and footers.
Cite your own previous work objectively (e.g., use “Smith (2022) demonstrated…” instead of “In our previous study (Smith, 2022), we demonstrated…”).
Ensure all document properties and metadata (File > Info > Properties in Word) containing author names are cleared before submission.

5. Confidentiality & Ethical Standards

Reviewer Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents. They are strictly prohibited from sharing, copying, or utilizing unpublished data from the manuscript for personal or professional gain.
Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must recuse themselves if they identify the author through internal clues or have a competing personal, financial, or professional relationship with the work..