JIM employs a double-blind peer review.  A detailed summary of our full editorial process is as follows. 

1. All submissions from authors are initially screened by the Chief Editor for their conformity to our scope and basic submission requirements. Manuscripts that fail to abide by our ethical standards are immediately rejected, as are those that do not fit within the journal's scope.
2. Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are then handed over to a section editor, who will select at least two relevant reviewers.
3. Once a reviewer has agreed to review the manuscript, they will assess the content of the manuscript and provide their recommendation to the Chief Editor.
4. After reviewers has submitted their recommendations, the manuscript is either rejected or revisions are requested.
5. The manuscript that requires revisions is returned to the submitting author, who will have up to two weeks to revise it. Once the revision is submitted, it is once again assessed by the section editor to determine whether the changes are adequate and appropriate. If the revisions are deemed to be inadequate, this step is repeated for further revision.
6. The revised manuscript is either accepted or rejected depending on whether the section editor has found the manuscript to have been improved to a level worthy of publication.
7. An accepted manuscript is returned to the submitting author for final editing of its language and content. Following which it will also be checked by copyeditor and editorial board before it is ultimately approve for publication.
8. Finally, the manuscript is handed over to the journal’s typesetter. And ,the final version of the article  is returned to the author for proofreading and final approval.