Guidelines

 

Instructions for Authors

IJRDO - Journal of Archaeology welcomes high-quality and original manuscripts that contribute to the advancement of archaeology, heritage studies, and interdisciplinary research. The journal provides an international platform for scholars, researchers, and professionals to disseminate innovative theoretical and applied research.

Aims and Scope

The journal provides a platform for scholarly work in archaeology, archaeobotany, archaeogenetics, bioarchaeology, environmental archaeology, cultural heritage studies, GIS and remote sensing, and related interdisciplinary areas.

MORE ABOUT SCOPE AREA

Manuscript Types Accepted

  • Original Research: Detailed studies reporting original research findings
  • Review Articles: Comprehensive analyses of specific topics
  • Case Studies: Documentation of findings and outcomes
  • Conceptual and theoretical papers

General Submission Requirements

Manuscripts should be submitted in English. All submissions must be original work, not previously published, and not under consideration elsewhere. Authors must follow ethical guidelines and disclose conflicts of interest.

Manuscript Preparation

  • Submit manuscripts in Microsoft Word (.docx) or LaTeX format
  • Use 12-point Times New Roman font with 1.5 line spacing
  • Include an abstract (150–250 words) and 4–6 keywords
  • Structure: Introduction, Literature Review, Methodology, Results, Discussion, Conclusion
  • Maximum manuscript length: 8,000 words

Formatting Requirements

  • Title page must include title, author names, affiliations, corresponding author details, and ORCID (if available)
  • Manuscripts should be written in American English
  • Number all pages consecutively
  • Use SI units for measurements
  • Tables and figures should be placed within the text at appropriate locations

Policy Links

  • Correction Policy
  • Copyright Policy
  • Licensing
  • Open Access
  • Plagiarism Policy
  • Publication Ethics

Contact: editor@ijrdo.org

Reviewer Guidelines

Peer Review Process

The journal follows a double-blind peer review system ensuring confidentiality and unbiased evaluation based on originality, academic merit, and relevance.

Manuscripts are evaluated solely on the basis of academic merit, originality, methodological rigour, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

This process is designed to ensure fairness, transparency, and high scholarly standards. All editorial decisions are made in accordance with internationally recognized ethical publishing guidelines.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

Reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the academic quality and integrity of the journal. They are responsible for providing objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations of submitted manuscripts.

Reviews should focus on the scientific merit of the research and provide recommendations that help improve the quality and clarity of the manuscript.

Read COPE guidelines

Criteria for Manuscript Evaluation

  • Subject Expertise: Reviewers should accept invitations only if the manuscript falls within their academic expertise
  • Availability and Timelines: Reviews should be completed within the specified timeframe to support efficient editorial decisions
  • Conflicts of Interest: Any financial, professional, or personal conflict of interest must be disclosed to the editorial office before undertaking the review

Assessment of Manuscript Sections

  • Title: Should clearly represent the focus of the study
  • Abstract: Should summarise objectives, methods, results, and conclusions
  • Introduction: Should define the research problem and objectives
  • Methodology: Should describe the research design and analytical approach
  • Results: Should present findings clearly and logically
  • Discussion and Conclusion: Should interpret findings and explain their significance
  • Tables and Figures: Should be properly labelled and support the textual content

Language and Clarity

Manuscripts should be written in clear and professional English. Authors are responsible for ensuring the grammatical accuracy and readability of the manuscript prior to submission.

Review Report Should Include

  • Summary of the manuscript
  • Major issues requiring revision
  • Minor comments and suggestions
  • Evaluation of originality and relevance
  • Assessment of methodology and results

Editorial Decisions

  • Accept
  • Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions
  • Reject

Ethical Standards

  • Confidentiality must be maintained
  • Reviews must be objective
  • Sources should be acknowledged
  • No misuse of unpublished data