Peer Review Policy

Modern Dynamics Journal of Chemistry (MDJC) adheres to a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scientific merit of published research.

Process:
1. Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts electronically via the Modern Dynamics Journal of Chemistry (MDJC) online submission system.
2. Initial Screening: The editorial team conducts an initial review to assess the manuscript's suitability for the journal's scope and format. Manuscripts that fall outside the scope or do not meet basic formatting requirements will be returned to the authors with appropriate feedback.
3. Peer Review: Suitable manuscripts are assigned to two or more independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers are chosen based on their qualifications and potential for a fair and unbiased evaluation. The identities of both authors and reviewers are anonymized throughout the process (double-blind).
4. Reviewer Evaluation: Reviewers assess the manuscript based on the following criteria:
    Originality: Does the research present novel findings that significantly advance the field?
    Methodology: Are the methodology and experimental design sound and appropriate for the research question?
   Results and Data Analysis: Are the results presented clearly and accurately? Are the data analyzed statistically and interpreted appropriately?
   Discussion and Conclusions: Are the results adequately discussed in the context of existing literature?

Are the conclusions justified by the data?
   Clarity and Conciseness: Is the manuscript well-written, clear, and concise?
   Significance: Does the research have broader implications for the field of modern chemical dynamics?
5. Review Decisions: Reviewers submit their evaluations and recommendations to the editor. These recommendations can include:
   Accept: The manuscript is of high quality and publishable without revisions.
   Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor revisions to address specific points raised by the reviewers before publication.
   Major Revisions: The manuscript requires significant revisions to address critical issues raised by the reviewers before being reconsidered for publication.
   Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards for publication.
6. Editorial Decision: The editor considers the reviewers' evaluations and makes a final decision regarding the manuscript's publication. The editor may consult with the reviewers to resolve any discrepancies. Authors receive a detailed decision letter outlining the editor's decision and any reviewer feedback.
7. Revisions and Appeals: Authors have the opportunity to revise their manuscript based on the reviewer feedback. If the manuscript is rejected, authors can appeal the decision by providing a detailed explanation of their concerns.
Modern Dynamics Journal of Chemistry (MDJC) is committed to a fair and timely peer review process. We value the expertise of our reviewers and their dedication to maintaining the high quality of published research in modern chemical dynamics.