Peer Review Policy

1. Double-Blind Peer Review Process

Impulse Research Work follows a rigorous double-blind peer review model for all research manuscripts. The identities of both the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation process to guarantee impartiality, intellectual rigor, and objective assessment.

2. Initial Desk Evaluation

Upon receipt, manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening by the Editor-in-Chief. Manuscripts lacking scholarly rigor, violating ethical standards, containing unoriginal content, or falling outside the journal scope will be desk-rejected without external review.

3. Review Criteria

Independent peer reviewers evaluate submissions against the following core criteria:

• Originality and contribution to the disciplinary body of knowledge.
• Methodological validity, theoretical foundation, and data robustness.
• Clarity of argumentation, logical flow, and academic writing quality.
• Compliance with ethical standards and citation authenticity.

4. Review Decision Framework

Based on reviewer recommendations, the Editorial Board reaches one of four decisions:

• Accept without revision: The manuscript is accepted in its current form.
• Minor Revisions: Minor textual or citation adjustments required.
• Major Revisions: Substantial theoretical, empirical, or methodological refinement required before re-evaluation.
• Reject: The manuscript does not meet the necessary academic standards.