Creative: The Research Journal of Shanto-Mariam University of Creative Technology is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, rigorous, and academically responsible editorial process. Every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes a structured evaluation designed to assess its relevance, originality, scholarly quality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and contribution to knowledge.
The journal follows the editorial process outlined below:
1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s designated submission system in accordance with the journal’s Author Guidelines. Authors are responsible for ensuring that the manuscript is original, complete, properly formatted, appropriately referenced, and not simultaneously under consideration by another journal.
2. Administrative and Technical Check
Following submission, the manuscript undergoes an initial administrative check. The editorial office examines whether the submission is complete and complies with the journal’s basic requirements, including manuscript structure, author information, declarations, references, figures and tables, where applicable.
Manuscripts that do not meet the basic submission requirements may be returned to the authors for correction before editorial assessment.
3. Preliminary Editorial Screening
The Editor and/or Associate Editor conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript falls within the journal’s scope and demonstrates sufficient scholarly relevance and quality to proceed further.
At this stage, consideration may be given to the manuscript’s originality, research significance, clarity of research objectives, theoretical or conceptual foundation, methodological appropriateness, quality of analysis, and potential contribution to the relevant field.
A manuscript may be declined at this stage if it is clearly outside the journal’s scope or does not meet the minimum scholarly requirements for further consideration.
4. Research Integrity and Ethical Screening
Submissions may be examined for potential issues relating to plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, duplicate or redundant publication, authorship, citation practices, data integrity, conflicts of interest, and other matters of research and publication ethics.
Where research involves human participants, confidential information, or other areas requiring ethical oversight, authors may be required to provide appropriate ethical approval, informed-consent information, or relevant declarations, as applicable.
5. Assignment to an Editor
A manuscript that successfully passes the preliminary screening is assigned to an appropriate editor or editorial representative based on the subject area and expertise required.
The handling editor oversees the subsequent evaluation process and seeks to ensure that editorial decisions are based on academic merit rather than authors' institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, personal relationships, or other irrelevant considerations.
6. Selection of Independent Reviewers
Suitable reviewers with relevant subject expertise are invited to evaluate the manuscript. Reviewers should be capable of providing an independent and constructive scholarly assessment and should disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality.
Where an invited reviewer has a significant conflict of interest, another reviewer should be selected.
7. Peer Review
Manuscripts proceeding to external evaluation normally undergo peer review by at least two independent reviewers.
Reviewers are generally requested to assess matters such as originality and significance, relevance of the research problem, engagement with existing literature, theoretical or conceptual foundation, appropriateness of methodology, reliability and interpretation of results, quality of discussion and conclusions, clarity of presentation, adequacy of references, and overall contribution to knowledge.
Reviewers are expected to provide constructive comments that can assist both the editorial decision and improvement of the manuscript.
8. First Editorial Decision
After considering the reviewers’ reports and the manuscript as a whole, the Editor may reach one of the following decisions:
Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, Resubmit for Review. Reject
The decision and relevant reviewers’ comments are communicated to the corresponding author.
9. Author Revision and Response
Where revision is requested, authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a clear response explaining how the reviewers’ and editor’s comments have been addressed.
Where an author disagrees with a particular recommendation, the author may provide a reasoned academic explanation rather than making the requested change.
10. Re-evaluation of the Revised Manuscript
The revised manuscript is evaluated by the handling editor. In cases of substantial or major revision, the manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or, where necessary, sent to additional reviewers.
More than one round of revision may be required before a final editorial decision is reached.
11. Final Editorial Decision
The final decision regarding publication is made on the basis of the manuscript’s scholarly quality, reviewers’ assessments, authors’ revisions, ethical compliance, and suitability for the journal.
The Editor retains responsibility for the final editorial decision. Acceptance is not guaranteed merely because a manuscript has undergone peer review or revision.
12. Copyediting and Language Editing
Following acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to editorial production. The text may be reviewed for grammar, consistency, academic style, references, headings, tables, figures, and general presentation.
Editorial changes should not alter the authors’ substantive arguments or research findings without appropriate consultation.
13. Proof Preparation and Author Verification
A publication proof is prepared and, where applicable, provided to the corresponding author for final verification. Authors should carefully check names, affiliations, tables, figures, references, typographical errors, and other production details.
At the proof stage, substantial changes to the accepted manuscript are normally discouraged unless necessary to correct a significant error.
14. Final Publication
Following completion of editorial and production requirements, the article is published in the appropriate volume and issue of Creative: The Research Journal of Shanto-Mariam University of Creative Technology.
The published article becomes part of the journal’s scholarly record.
15. Post-Publication Review and Corrections
The journal recognizes that editorial responsibility continues after publication. If a significant error, ethical concern, authorship issue, or question concerning the reliability of published content is subsequently identified, the matter may be investigated.
Where justified, appropriate post-publication action may include a correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the nature and seriousness of the issue.
Editorial Independence and Confidentiality
Editorial decisions should be based on the scholarly merits of submitted work. Editors and reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of unpublished manuscripts and information obtained through the review process.
Authors, reviewers, and editors should disclose relevant conflicts of interest. Where an editor has a conflict concerning a particular manuscript, responsibility for handling that submission should be transferred to another appropriate editor.