ANVESHAN: International Journal of Humanities, Cultural Studies and Social Sciences
(Published by Classic Indic Press)
ANVESHAN: International Journal of Humanities, Cultural and Social Sciences, published by ClassicIndic Press, is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, editorial transparency, and academic integrity. We expect all stakeholders—authors, editors, and peer reviewers—to adhere strictly to international ethical norms as formulated by leading scholarly organizations, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Authors submitting manuscripts to ANVESHAN must strictly abide by our editorial and submission guidelines. Classic Indic Press reserves the right to investigate and act against any of the following unethical practices:
Simultaneous or Duplicate Submission: Manuscripts are accepted with the explicit understanding that the work has not been previously published, nor is it currently under review or consideration by any other journal or publishing platform. Concrete editorial and administrative action will be taken against authors found engaging in concurrent submissions.
Plagiarism and Copyright Integrity:Plagiarism in any form—including direct copying, paraphrasing without proper attribution, or self-plagiarism—is strictly prohibited. Authors are required to ensure that all sources are fully acknowledged.Authors bear sole responsibility for obtaining written copyright permissions for any third-party figures, tables, or text extracts used in their manuscripts. Neither ANVESHAN nor Classic Indic Press shall be held liable for any copyright infringements.
Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): The use of Generative AI tools (e.g., Large Language Models, AI content generators) to generate manuscript text, manufacture data, or claim authorship is strictly prohibited. Generative AI tools may only be utilized for minor linguistic polishing, readability improvement, or basic grammatical checks. Authors must explicitly disclose the use of any AI tools in their cover letter or acknowledgements section upon submission.
Defamation and Commercial Promotion: Manuscripts must maintain scholarly objectivity. Submissions containing defamatory remarks, libellous content, or promotional/commercial messaging will be rejected immediately.
Diversity, Equity, and Non-Discrimination: ANVESHAN is deeply committed to fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion within academic discourse. Manuscripts containing bias, hate speech, or derogatory language based on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, disability, or language will not be tolerated.
In cases where academic misconduct or ethical violation is verified through formal editorial review, ANVESHAN and Classic Indic Press will execute one or more of the following corrective procedures:
Formal Retraction: Retraction of the published article via a public notification on the journal’s official web portal explaining the breach of ethics.
Corrigendum/Errata: Publication of a formal correction notice for minor inadvertent errors, accompanied by explicit justification.
Authorship Suspension: Immediate blacklisting of the offending author(s), barring them from future manuscript submissions to ANVESHAN and any associated publications of Classic Indic Press.
Institutional Notification: Dispatched official communication detailing the evidence of misconduct to the author’s institutional head, department chair, funding agency, or relevant governing authority.
To ensure complete transparency in academic publishing, all individuals involved in the peer-review and publication workflow must disclose potential conflicts of interest.
Authors are required to declare any financial, personal, promotional, or institutional relationships that could influence or bias their research outcomes. The corresponding author is responsible for submitting a signed Conflict of Interest declaration on behalf of all co-authors prior to manuscript submission.
Members of the Editorial Board and peer reviewers must recuse themselves from processing manuscripts in which they have competing financial, personal, or collaborative interests. Classic Indic Press strictly guarantees full editorial autonomy: the publisher does not interfere with peer-review evaluations or editorial decision-making. Internal conflicts or ethical concerns are handled confidentially by the Chief Editor and Executive Editor in compliance with international publication standards.
ANVESHAN and Classic Indic Press are committed to addressing genuine complaints, grievances, and appeals regarding editorial decisions with fairness, objectivity, and transparency.
Authors have the right to appeal an editorial decision (such as a rejection) if they reasonably believe the decision was influenced by a factual misunderstanding, procedural oversight, or reviewer bias.
To initiate an appeal, the corresponding author must submit a formal written request to the Chief Editor within 14 days of receiving the editorial decision.
The appeal letter must provide a clear, point-by-point academic justification and supporting evidence addressing the reviewers’ or editors’ critiques.
Appeals based solely on general dissatisfaction with the decision without concrete academic reasoning will not be considered.
All formal appeals are reassessed by the Chief Editor in consultation with an independent member of the Editorial Board (or Executive Editor) who was not involved in the initial evaluation. The decision reached following the appeal review is final and binding.
Complaints regarding editorial delays, reviewer misconduct, or breaches of ethics should be directed to the official email of the Editorial Office. All complaints will be acknowledged within 3–5 working days and investigated in full accordance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
ANVESHAN: International Journal of Humanities, Cultural Studies and Social Sciences
(Published by Classic Indic Press)
To maintain absolute editorial integrity, objectiveness, and academic fairness, ANVESHAN strictly operates under a Double-Blind Peer Review System. The identities of authors and reviewers are kept entirely anonymous from both parties throughout the editorial and evaluation process.
Prior to external peer review, all submitted manuscripts undergo a preliminary desk screening conducted by the Chief Editor or Executive Editor. Submissions are evaluated against primary qualification benchmarks:
Scope Alignment: The paper must fall directly within the interdisciplinary scope of Humanities, Cultural, or Social Sciences.
Originality & Intellectual Merit: The manuscript must offer fresh perspectives, critical insight, or novel research findings.
Methodological Validity: The submission must employ rigorous and appropriate qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods research approaches.
Academic Impact: The research must demonstrate clear potential for contributing to scholarly literature and earning future citations.
Manuscripts failing to satisfy these preliminary criteria are rejected at the desk level, with immediate written notification issued to the corresponding author.
Submissions passing preliminary editorial screening are assigned to two independent subject experts—typically combining one internal member of the Editorial Board and one external reviewer from our international panel. This evaluation protocol applies equally to manuscripts submitted by Editorial Board members.
Reviewers must treat all received manuscripts as privileged, confidential communications. Drafts must not be circulated, quoted, or discussed with outside parties without explicit prior written authorization from the Chief Editor.
Evaluations must remain strictly objective, focused purely on academic merit, and free from personal or ad hominem criticism.
Reviewers are requested to complete their evaluations within the agreed time frame (normally 2–3 weeks). If an assigned reviewer anticipates a delay or is unable to complete the review, they must notify the editorial office promptly to arrange an extension or alternate assignment.
Reviewers must actively monitor manuscripts for ethical non-compliance, including:
Plagiarism & Duplicate Publication: Unattributed text borrowing, self-plagiarism, or redundant submissions.
Generative AI Policy Violation: Unauthorized usage of Generative AI tools for text composition or data synthesis (AI usage is strictly limited to basic copyediting or readability improvements).
Undisclosed Conflicts: Potential commercial, personal, or institutional biases.
Any suspected misconduct must be reported immediately to the Chief Editor accompanied by supporting evidence.
Reviewers must recuse themselves from evaluating any manuscript if a conflict of interest exists—whether financial, collaborative, personal, or institutional—with any of the authors or associated entities.
Reviewers are requested to evaluate submissions across the following structural and content dimensions:
Verify that the manuscript title is concise, academic, and accurately reflects the core focus of the paper.
Ensure the Abstract provides a coherent summary of research objectives, methodologies, key arguments, and conclusions.
Confirm that Keywords are relevant, standardized, and effective for academic indexing.
Assess whether the theoretical conceptualization is robust and thoroughly integrated into the analytical discussion.
Evaluate the appropriateness, rigor, and execution of the methodology employed.
Ensure that arguments are logically constructed, supported by credible primary and secondary sources, and divided logically using thematic subheadings.
Verify that the paper incorporates up-to-date regional and global scholarship. In fields where peer-reviewed articles are limited, acceptable secondary sources (such as archival materials, interviews, book reviews, or news archives) may be utilized with proper context.
Confirm that the text adheres to an objective third-person academic tone. The use of first-person pronouns (“I”, “we”) should be minimized or avoided where appropriate.
Ensure the manuscript remains free from activist rhetoric, ideological bias, or discriminatory language related to gender, race, culture, religion, or language.
APA Citation Style: All in-text citations and reference entries must strictly adhere to the APA Style Manual.
Footnotes / Endnotes: The journal discourages footnotes and endnotes; explanatory points should be seamlessly integrated into the body narrative.
Copyright & Permissions: Reviewers must verify that third-party copyrighted materials (images, maps, charts, or extensive textual excerpts) carry appropriate permissions and source attributions under Fair Use guidelines.
Reviewers must provide a definitive publication recommendation selecting one of the following decisions:
Accept without Revisions: The manuscript meets all publication standards in its current form.
Accept with Minor Revisions: The paper requires minor textual, formatting, or bibliographical adjustments.
Major Revisions Required: The manuscript requires significant methodological, structural, or theoretical reworking prior to re-evaluation.
Reject: The manuscript suffers from fundamental flaws, lack of originality, or ethical non-compliance and is unsuitable for publication.
Reviewers should utilize MS Word’s Track Changes and Commenting tools to insert specific, constructive feedback directly within the manuscript file.
Reviewers must ensure their user profile name in MS Word is anonymized (e.g., set to “Reviewer 1”) prior to saving and returning the annotated manuscript.
ANVESHAN: International Journal of Humanities, Cultural Studies and Social Sciences
(Published by Classic Indic Press)
At ANVESHAN, we believe that an academic journal is not merely a repository of published articles, but a dynamic platform for scholarly growth. Our Editorial Board is deeply committed to mentoring the academic community, ensuring that the peer-review and publication process is constructive, transparent, and educational.
Developmental Feedback: We recognize the challenges faced by doctoral candidates, post-doctoral fellows, and early-career researchers. Our editors are instructed to provide constructive, actionable, and developmental feedback rather than merely pointing out flaws.
Demystifying the Process: We assist new authors in understanding international publication standards, including formatting requirements, citation ethics (APA guidelines), and the nuances of responding to reviewer comments effectively.
Transparent Communication: We maintain clear, timely, andempathetic communication with authors throughout the manuscript lifecycle, ensuring they are regularly updated on the status of their submissions.
Pre-submission Guidance: The editorial desk offers preliminary guidance on whether a proposed abstract or concept aligns with the journal’s interdisciplinary scope, saving authors valuable time.
Reviewer Orientation: We provide our reviewers with comprehensive rubrics and evaluation templates to ensure their critiques are objective, well-structured, and strictly academic.
Fostering Constructive Critique: Reviewers are mentored to frame their assessments in a supportive tone, avoiding hostile or overly dismissive language, thereby upholding the dignity of the author’s intellectual labor.
Collaborative Dialogue: Through editorials, special issues, andpotential academic webinars, ANVESHAN aims to foster a global network of scholars in the humanities and social sciences. We encourage cross-disciplinary collaborations that push the boundaries of traditional research.
Special Issues and Thematic Collections are central to the scholarly mission of ANVESHAN. Guest Editors (GEs) are distinguished scholars invited to lead these focused collections. Because Special Issues often attract high citation rates, Guest Editors bear significant academic and administrative responsibilities.
The lifecycle of a Guest Editor’s role is divided into the following key phases:
Phase 1: Conceptualization and Proposal
Thematic Innovation: GEs are responsible for identifying an emerging, highly relevant, or under-researched topic within the fields of humanities, cultural studies, or social sciences.
Drafting the Proposal: GEs must submit a detailed Special Issue Proposal to the Chief Editor, outlining the rationale, aims and scope, target audience, and a list of potential contributors.
Phase 2: Call for Papers (CFP) and Manuscript Solicitation
Drafting the CFP: GEs prepare a comprehensive Call for Papers detailing the thematic sub-topics, critical questions to be addressed, submission deadlines, and specific formatting guidelines.
Active Solicitation: Relying on their professional networks, GEs actively invite leading academicians, researchers, and subject-matter experts to contribute high-quality original research to the issue.
Phase 3: Initial Screening and Triage
Scope Verification: Upon receiving submissions, GEs conduct a preliminary desk review to ensure each manuscript strictly aligns with the Special Issue’s theme and meets the foundational academic standards of ANVESHAN.
Desk Rejections: GEs have the authority to desk-reject manuscripts that are off-topic, conceptually weak, or fail to adhere to linguistic and formatting norms, thereby saving reviewers’ time.
Phase 4: Managing the Double-Blind Peer Review
Reviewer Assignment: GEs are responsible for selecting at least two independent, external subject experts for each manuscript. They must ensure that reviewers have no conflict of interest with the authors.
Ensuring Rigor and Anonymity: GEs must guarantee that the Double-Blind Peer Review process is rigorously upheld. All author-identifying metadata must be stripped from the files before they are sent to reviewers.
Timeline Management: GEs monitor the review process to ensure timely evaluations. They mediate conflicting reviewer reports by either evaluating the critiques themselves or assigning a third adjudicating reviewer.
Phase 5: Editorial Decision-Making
Synthesizing Feedback: Based on peer-review reports, GEs formulate a clear editorial recommendation for each manuscript: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject.
Final Approval: While GEs make primary recommendations, the final decision regarding acceptance rests exclusively with the Chief Editor of ANVESHAN, ensuring institutional quality control and adherence to COPE guidelines.
Phase 6: Ethical Oversight and Quality Assurance
Safeguarding Integrity: GEs play a crucial frontline role in detecting academic misconduct. They must remain vigilant against plagiarism, redundant publications, and unauthorized use of Generative AI.
Resolving Disputes: In coordination with the Executive Editor, GEs address any ethical concerns raised by reviewers during the evaluation phase.
Phase 7: The Editorial Introduction (Synthesis)
Authoring the Editorial: Once all manuscripts are finalized, the Guest Editors author an introductory piece (Editorial). This essay provides the theoretical context for the Special Issue, summarizes the key findings of the included articles, and outlines future directions for research in that specific sub-field.
Phase 8: Post-Publication Promotion
Enhancing Visibility: Post-publication, GEs are expected to act as ambassadors for the Special Issue. They promote the collection through academic networks (e.g., ResearchGate, Academia.edu), university portals, social media platforms, and at relevant international conferences to maximize the impact and citation potential of the published works.