The goal of peer review is to improve the manuscript qualitatively. This painstaking process is followed in order to ensure the quality of the articles published in Omega. The editorial team of Omega is much obliged to the reviewers for their feedback upon review of referred articles. Omega is committed to following the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://publicationethics.org).
The reviewers for the articles published in Omega are chosen from a wide range of sources covering the editorial board, suggestions by authors, scholars in the field, etc.
Importance, clarity of ideas, and originality are ensured in the review process.
Omega follows the double-blind review process by which the manuscript will be sent to two reviewers. The identity of the authors and reviewers will be hidden from each other.
The blind review process is envisaged to be fair and unbiased. Reviewers are expected to be the utmost objective doing away with personal criticism. If the manuscript is flawed, the content and not the author should be subjected to criticism.
The reviewer will assume to be someone like the mentor of the author and make recommendations to improve the quality of the content of the manuscript. Clear opinions on the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript will be much appreciated.
Special consideration could be given to manuscripts approaching the science-philosophy-religion dialogue from the multireligious and multicultural perspectives, particularly the Hindu and Indian perspectives. Omega is committed to the promotion of science-religion dialogue from the Indian perspective in a non-denominational and non-sectarian manner.
Wherever conflict of interest is involved, reviewers will decline to review the referred manuscript.
The confidentiality of the manuscript will be preserved under all circumstances.
The report of the reviewer also will be kept confidential by the reviewer.
The review comments will be sent to the editor in chief only.
In reviewing the manuscript following the following checklist may be helpful:
Is the topic suitable to the vision and mission of Omega?
Does the manuscript sufficiently reflect the interdisciplinary dialogue between science, philosophy, religion, spirituality, and ethics?
Is the title, abstract, keywords, introduction, and conclusions appropriate?
Does the manuscript clearly articulate its objective through research questions or research statements?
Is the research consistent with the ethical norms of publication with necessary approval and permissions?
Are the tables and figures properly numbered and organized?
Do the conclusions stem from the arguments and the content?
Is the length of the manuscript proportionate to the content?
Is there any plagiarism involved in the manuscript?