Core Principle
IndPol undertakes blind peer review. Blind peer review is a method applied to ensure that scientific publications are of the highest quality. This method forms the basis of the objective evaluation of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific journals.

1-Submission and Initial Check
The author submits the article to the journal through the online system. The Assistant Editor or Secretariat performs an initial check, reviewing the formal compliance of the article with the journal's template and basic requirements. If it does not meet the requirements outlined in our guide, it will be returned to you for revisions prior to peer review.

2- Evaluation by Section Editor
The section editor evaluates the article's alignment with the journal's scope and publication policies, as well as its level of originality. The introduction, literature review, methodology, findings, and conclusion sections are thoroughly examined.
Manuscripts that fall outside the scope of the journal or are otherwise deemed unsuitable may be rejected at this stage without external review. Once your manuscript passes the initial assessment, it will proceed to the peer review process. You can log in at any time to check the status of your submission. You will be notified once a decision has been made. The journal adheres to a rigorous double-blind peer review policy, ensuring that the identities of both the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the process. Two independent reviews are required for a manuscript to receive a decision of either "Revise" or "Accept."

3- Peer Review Assignment and Evaluation
At least two reviewers are assigned, with the article's subject and the reviewers' areas of expertise being considered in the selection. Reviewers either make direct corrections on the article or provide feedback through 10 multiple-choice and 3 open-ended questions. If the author disagrees with the reviewers' comments, they can submit their responses and objections. Review outcomes:
• Two positive reviews → The article is forwarded to the Editorial Board with a recommendation for publication.
• Two negative reviews → The article is rejected.
• One positive, one negative review → The article is sent to a third reviewer. A decision is made based on the majority opinion.

4- Revisions and Author Responses
If the reviewers request minor or major revisions, the author makes the necessary corrections and uploads the revised version to the system. The author includes a response letter explaining the changes made in line with the reviewers' suggestions. The revised article is sent back to the same reviewers if necessary.

5- Final Decision and Editorial Board Review
Once all peer reviews and revisions are complete, the section editor provides their final opinion on the article. The section editor submits the article to the Editorial Board with a recommendation for publication. The Editorial Board either accepts or rejects the article.

6- Acceptance and Production
After acceptance, the author receives an acceptance letter. The editorial team reviews the article for language and formatting. After any necessary final revisions, the author’s approval is obtained, and the article is prepared for publication.

7- Online First publication
This enables us to publish final articles online immediately, without waiting for assignment to a future issue of the Journal. This usually significantly reduces publication lead time.