Plagiarism Policy


Plagiarism is showing other’s work or ideas as own, with or without their approval. All reported and unreported data in any form are enclosed under their definition. Plagiarism is an offensive under publication ethics and IJAIR cannot appreciate any kind of plagiarism in their publication.

Before Publication:-

At the very initial stage of evaluation if plagiarism is detected in any form through detector, will inform to author for the revision of submitted manuscript. If plagiarism is more than 20% than the submitted manuscript rejected for the publication and informed accordingly.

Plagiarism Handled:-

If plagiarism is detected in manuscript that was handled by the editor in following manner:

• 5 % to 10% ;submitted manuscript allotted the Ref. id and give them time for revision
• 10% to 20%; submitted manuscript allotted the Ref. id and give them suggestion for revision and apply for publication.
• More than 20% submitted manuscript Rejected for the publication.

Plagiarism Declaration:-

Once the manuscript is accepted for the publication, author has sent a declaration to IJAIR that, I have gone through and understand the IJAIR policy on plagiarism. I hereby declare that this written manuscript is the result of my own independent intellectual work, and that in all cases material from the work of others (in books, articles, essays, dissertations, and on the internet) is properly accredited, and are clearly indicated. No data other than that mentioned has been used. This article has not previously not yet been published. (Copyright form)

Plagiarism after Publication:-

If plagiarism was detected after the publication by any other means, IJAIR inform the author and has taken required action against as per the policy. After the investigation done and plagiarism found in the published manuscript then that published manuscript is retracted with due notice.

Peer Review Policy

We are committed to timely valuation and publication of fully acknowledged papers. The practice of peer review ensures that good research paper is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good rational publishing. To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undertake a meticulous evaluation process. Our reviewers play a fundamental role in maintaining the high quality standards. All manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure below:

Initial Evaluation :

The Editor first evaluates manuscripts and undergoes a rigorous process. It is rare, possibility for an outstanding manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are inadequately unique and more plagiarism, has serious scientific flaws, has poor grammar, or is outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed.

Nature of Peer Review:

We employ double blind reviewing method, where both the reviewer and author remain unknown throughout the process. Sometimes we follow single blind reviewing method too, where the reviewer knows the author but author doesn’t know the reviewer.

Reviewer reports:

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: - Is unique - Is methodologically and ideally sound. They followed appropriate ethical methods and guidelines. Has given unbiased result which supports the conclusions.


All acknowledged manuscripts are considered as classified documents. We expect our team to take care of manuscripts as confidential material. Editors and reviewers involved in the review process should divulge conflicts of concern resulting from spirited, mutual, or other relationships with any of the authors, and remove oneself from cases in which such conflicts prevent an objective evaluation.

Time Taken:

The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the reviewers. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a reviewer to review the manuscript, or when the one reviewer’s report has thoroughly convinced the Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one reviewer’s report. The Editor’s decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the reviewers, which usually includes comments by the reviewers. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial reviewers who may then request another revision of a manuscript.