Article Submission: Shodh Sari- An International Multidisciplinary Journal is an open access journal and remain open for general submissions year-round. Faculty and researchers from different disciplines could submit their articles electronically at Submit your Manuscript or for queries write us at shodhsari@icert.org.in
Please visit the Submission Guidelines for further information.

Please note this journal accept articles in English and Hindi only.
Only high quality, original and unpublished research articles will be accepted.

There is no publication fee/ or publication charges or article processing fee for this journal. This platform provides free of cost publication opportunities to the education fraternity.

A certificate of publication, a soft copy of the article with article access link will be shared with authors.
Review Policy
Editorial Review and Peer Review
All submissions to Shodh Sari Journal are first reviewed for completeness and only then sent to be assessed by an Editor who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. Where an Editor is on the author list or has any other competing interest regarding a specific manuscript, another member of the Editorial Board will be assigned to oversee peer review. Editors will consider the peer-reviewed reports when making a decision, but are not bound by the opinions or recommendations therein. Authors receive peer review reports with the editorial decision on their manuscript.

Editor(s) to obtain a minimum of two peer reviewers for manuscripts especially to discipline specific. Peer review reports should be in English and provide constructive critical evaluations of the authors’ work, particularly in relation to the appropriateness of methods used, whether the results are accurate, and whether the conclusions are supported by the results. Editorial decisions should be based on peer reviewer comments that meet these criteria rather than on recommendations made by short, superficial peer reviewer reports which do not provide a rationale for the recommendations.

Peer reviewers are expected to provide an assessment on the following aspects of manuscripts, key results, validity, originality, significance, data and methodology, statistics, conclusion, clarity, contexts, references, and suggested improvements.

Communications between Editors and peer reviewers contain confidential information that should not be shared with third parties.

Responsibilities of Reviewers
This journal offers masked peer review (where both the authors’ and reviewers’ identities are not known to the other). All articles are double reviewed, by editorial board and peer group as per specialization. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.

 

• Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.

• Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone.

• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research.

• Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

• Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

• Reviewers should not upload their peer review report into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.

• The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.

• A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

• Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

• Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

• The reviewer will submit review report the concerned editor only, who is assisting the reviewer in review process.

​

Responsibility of Editor/s
It is the overall responsibility of the editors to publish the high-quality articles as per journal policies and guidelines. Some responsibilities but not limited to mentioned below, are:

1. Editors have total control over whether or not an article is accepted or rejected.
2. Editors are in charge of the publication's content and general quality.
3. When trying to promote a publishing, editors should constantly consider the demands of the              writers and readers thereby ensuring that the articles are of top quality and that the academic            record is accurate.
4. When needed, editors should issue erroneous pages or make revisions and besides this should        make judgments entirely on the basis of the articles' significance, originality, clarity, and                      relevance to the scope of the journal.
5. Editors should have a thorough understanding of the funding sources for a study.
6.Editors should protect reviewers' identities.
7.Editors should make sure that any study they publish follows globally acknowledged ethical               criteria.
8. Editors should act if they suspect misbehavior in a manuscript, whether it is published or                   unpublished, and make all reasonable efforts to resolve the issue.

Plagiarism Policy
Shodh Sari only accept high quality, original and unpublished research articles. We are strictly against any unethical act of copying or plagiarism in any form. All manuscripts submitted for publication are cross-checked for plagiarism using Turnitin software. Manuscripts found to be plagiarized during initial stages of review will be rejected and not considered for publication in the journal. In case a manuscript is found to be plagiarized after publication, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct preliminary investigation, may be with the help of a suitable committee constituted for the purpose.
We respect intellectual property and aims at protecting and promoting original work of its authors. Manuscripts containing plagiarized material are against the standards of quality, research and innovation. Hence, all authors submitting articles are expected to abide ethical standards and abstain from plagiarism, in any form.
Editor-in-Chief shall take serious action against published manuscripts found to contain plagiarism, as recommended by or as deemed fit for the instant case or as decided by the Editorial Board, from time to time.

Corrections and Retractions Policy
If there is suspicion of misbehavior or alleged fraud, the editorial board will investigate as per journal guidelines. If there are valid concerns after an investigation, the authors will be contacted and given an opportunity to address the issue. Depending on the situation, this may result in the journal and/or publisher’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to:

1. Rejecting the manuscript if it is still under consideration.

2. Resubmission of the article with corrections.

3. If the article has already been published online, depending on the nature and severity of the infraction:

• An erratum/correction may be placed with the article.

• The article may be placed with an editor’s note or editorial expression of concern.

• Or, in severe cases, retraction of the article may occur.

​

The reason will be given in the published erratum/correction, editor’s note, editorial expression of concern, or retraction notice. Retraction means that the article is maintained on the platform watermarked “retracted,” and the explanation is provided in a note linked to the watermarked article.

Ethical Statement
Shodh Sari ensure the publication of high-quality original research having public trust and impact. The publisher remains constrained by requirements such as the copyright, infringement and plagiarism following the norms prescribed by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) to support publication ethics. The publisher shall be responsible for keeping all correspondences secret and under no circumstance shall disclose anything that goes against the interest of authors, referees and editors of the journal. Stakeholder including the authors, reviewers and editors in publication and review process, are supposed to carefully follow the publication ethics and discourage publication malpractices of any kind.

Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism, and ultimately the entire research community & endeavour. The manuscript should not be submitted to more than one publication for simultaneous consideration. The submitted work should be original and should not have been published elsewhere in any form or language (partially or in full), unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work. (Please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the concerns about text-recycling (‘self-plagiarism’). A single study should not be split up into several parts to increase the quantity of submissions and submitted to various publications or to one publication over time (i.e. ‘salami-slicing/publishing’). Concurrent or secondary publication is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. Results should be presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation (including image-based manipulation). Authors should adhere to discipline-specific rules for acquiring, selecting and processing data. No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (‘plagiarism’). Proper acknowledgements to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks (to indicate words taken from another source) are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions secured for material that is copyrighted.
If there is suspicion of misbehaviour or alleged fraud the Journal and/or Publisher will carry out an investigation following COPE guidelines. If, after investigation, there are valid concerns, the author(s) concerned will be contacted under their given e-mail address and given an opportunity to address the issue as per Corrections and Retractions Policy.

Consent
Informed consent is the process of telling potential research participants about the key elements of a research study and what their participation will involve. The informed consent process is one of the central components of the ethical conduct of research with human subjects. The consent process typically includes providing the required information (i.e., elements of informed consent) and the presentation of that information to prospective participants. Authors will be responsible for the personal information of the subject included in the article. Please read the Informed Consent Guidelines.

Human and Animal Rights
If the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association for experiments involving humans. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Conflict of Interest Statement and Research Misconduct
As per Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines:
‘Conflicts of interest arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that are not fully apparent and that may influence their judgments on what is published. They have been described as those which, when revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived.’

Authors are required to read the journal’s author instruction and ethical policies carefully and to adhere to the terms before submission.

Many scholars, researchers and professionals may have potential conflicts of interest, that could – or could be seen to – have an effect on their research.

The editors, authors, and peer reviewers should disclose interests that might appear to affect their ability to present or review work objectively. These might include relevant financial interests (for example, patent ownership, stock ownership, consultancies, or speaker’s fees), or personal, political, or religious interests.

Articles will be evaluated fairly and will not necessarily be rejected when any competing interests are declared. Report of research misconduct, if any, may be related to a published article or a manuscript under peer-review process, should proceed with sensitivity, tact, in confidence, to shodhsari@icert.org.in

All research misconduct complaints will be treated as per complaints and appeal policy, and Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

Complaints and Appeals
Complaints regarding any published materials will only be accepted within 12 months from the first publication date. In case of any complaint, the authors are required to submit their complaints along with their reasons to the editorial office via shodhsari@icert.org.in e-mail address.

Every attempt will be made to provide a full response as earliest. Complaints will be dealt with by the editorial team wherever possible, with reference to the journal policies. It will be escalated to the Editor-in-Chief where necessary. Where a complaint is made about an Editor, it will be independently investigated by one or the other two Editors or a committee constituted by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with Core Committee ICERT, if required so seeing the severity of the complaint. Complaints against authors and reviewers will also be dealt in the same manner. The Editor-in-Chief has the right to consult the other Editors or with any third party over the issue, and make a final decision. That final decision shall be binding, and the matter shall be deemed closed.

If you do not feel your complaint has been addressed, you may wish to refer it further. We will consider appeals against the editorial decision only under highly specific circumstances and usually only where a clear breach of policy can be demonstrated or author can indicate a clear misunderstanding of the article by the reviewer.