Review Process

The Digital Repository for Indian Scholarly Texts & Information (DRISTI) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, transparent and impartial peer-review process. Every publication submitted to DRISTI undergoes editorial assessment and independent peer review to ensure originality, academic quality, methodological rigour and scholarly significance before publication.

Our review process is designed to uphold research integrity while providing constructive feedback that helps authors strengthen the quality and impact of their work.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, every manuscript undergoes a preliminary evaluation by the DRISTI Secretariat.

During this stage, the manuscript is assessed for:

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of DRISTI.
  • Originality and scholarly contribution.
  • Academic quality and significance.
  • Compliance with manuscript formatting requirements.
  • Completeness of submission.
  • Compliance with publication ethics and research integrity standards.
  • Suitability for peer review.

Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum editorial requirements may be returned to the author for revision or declined without proceeding to external peer review.

Independent Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial assessment are assigned to independent subject experts for peer review.

DRISTI ordinarily follows a double-blind peer-review process, whereby the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. Depending on the publication type, the Editorial Board may adopt single-blind or open peer review where appropriate.

Each manuscript is generally reviewed by two independent reviewers, while highly specialised or interdisciplinary submissions may be evaluated by three or more reviewers where necessary.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and innovation.
  • Contribution to existing scholarship.
  • Research design and methodology.
  • Accuracy and validity of findings.
  • Critical analysis and interpretation.
  • Quality of literature review.
  • Organisation and clarity of presentation.
  • Relevance of references.
  • Ethical compliance.
  • Overall suitability for publication.

Reviewers provide detailed recommendations together with confidential comments for the Editorial Board and constructive feedback for the authors.

Editorial Decision

Following peer review, the Editor-in-Chief or designated Editorial Committee considers the reviewer reports and makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision.
  • Accept subject to minor revisions.
  • Major revisions required.
  • Resubmit for further review.
  • Reject.

Reviewer comments are anonymised before being shared with authors. Where revisions are requested, authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript together with a response explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed. Where necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation before a final publication decision is made.

Review Timeline

DRISTI accepts submissions throughout the year. While publication timelines vary according to the complexity of each manuscript, the review process generally includes:

  • Initial editorial screening.
  • Assignment of reviewers.
  • Independent peer review.
  • Author revisions.
  • Final editorial decision.
  • Copyediting and production.
  • Digital publication.

The DRISTI Secretariat keeps authors informed throughout each stage of the editorial and review process.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the academic quality and credibility of DRISTI publications. Reviewers are expected to:

  • provide objective, impartial and constructive evaluations;
  • maintain confidentiality of all submitted materials;
  • disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest;
  • evaluate manuscripts solely on scholarly merit;
  • identify relevant literature where appropriate;
  • report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication or research misconduct;
  • complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.

Reviewers are not expected to undertake copyediting or language editing, although suggestions that improve clarity and readability are welcomed. Professional, respectful and evidence-based feedback is expected at all times.

Reviewer Recognition

DRISTI recognises the valuable contribution of reviewers to scholarly publishing. Reviewers may be periodically evaluated based on:

  • quality of reviews;
  • timeliness;
  • professionalism;
  • subject expertise;
  • contribution to editorial excellence.

Outstanding reviewers may be invited to join DRISTI's Editorial Board, Academic Advisory Board or Reviewer Recognition Programme.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring that every manuscript receives a fair, unbiased and timely review.

Editors shall:

  • select qualified and independent reviewers;
  • maintain confidentiality;
  • avoid conflicts of interest;
  • ensure compliance with publication ethics;
  • make decisions solely on academic merit;
  • safeguard the integrity of the review process.

Where an editor has a conflict of interest with a submission, responsibility for the manuscript shall be assigned to another independent editor.

Copyediting, Proofreading and Publication

Following acceptance, manuscripts proceed through professional production, including:

  • copyediting;
  • language review where required;
  • typesetting;
  • metadata preparation;
  • ISBN and DOI registration;
  • author proof review;
  • final publication;
  • indexing and dissemination.

Authors are provided with publication proofs and are expected to review and approve them before final publication.

Become a Reviewer

DRISTI welcomes experienced researchers, academicians and professionals interested in serving as peer reviewers. Prospective reviewers should possess recognised expertise within their discipline together with a demonstrated record of scholarly research and publication. Applications to join the DRISTI Reviewer Network may be submitted to the DRISTI Secretariat through the official contact channels provided on the DRISTI platform.

Ethical Standards

DRISTI is committed to preserving the integrity, transparency and independence of the peer-review process. All editorial and peer-review activities are conducted in accordance with internationally recognised publication ethics, including the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). Any allegation of reviewer misconduct, editorial misconduct, conflicts of interest or manipulation of the peer-review process will be investigated promptly and fairly. Where misconduct is established, appropriate corrective action will be taken in accordance with DRISTI's Publication Ethics Policy.