After submission, the manuscript is first evaluated by the Editorial Team. This initial screening determines whether the manuscript is suitable for further peer review.

• Relevance to the journal's focus and scope;
• Compliance with the journal's author guidelines and template;
• Completeness of manuscript components;
• Originality and similarity considerations;
• General academic quality and clarity of presentation;
• Compliance with publication ethics requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or rejected without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to reviewers who possess relevant expertise in the subject area. Reviewer selection takes into consideration academic competence, research expertise, independence, and potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, confidentially, and constructively.

JIMP applies a double-blind peer-review process. The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers, and the identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors. This system is intended to promote independent, objective, and fair scholarly evaluation.

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on its originality, scientific contribution, methodological quality, clarity of presentation, relevance of results, quality of discussion, appropriateness of conclusions, and adequacy of references.

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to carefully address the comments and recommendations provided by reviewers and editors.

• Authors should revise the manuscript according to the review comments.
• A response to reviewers should clearly explain how each comment has been addressed.
• Any recommendation not followed should be accompanied by an appropriate academic justification.
• Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editor in Chief or the responsible editor after considering the reviewers' reports, the authors' revisions, the manuscript's academic quality, and its compliance with journal policies. Reviewer recommendations inform the editorial decision but do not independently determine the final outcome.

Editors and reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and information obtained during the review process. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect their objectivity and should decline a review assignment when an appropriate independent assessment cannot be provided.