Peer Review Guidelines

Submit Journal Article          Submit Book Proposal          Submit Book Manuscript

Welcome to the Peer Review Guidelines section. Conducting a fair, thorough, and constructive peer review is vital to ensuring the academic integrity and quality of our publications. This guide outlines the key principles and processes for managing the peer review effectively.

  1. Principles of Peer Review
  • Confidentiality: All submitted materials and communications must be kept confidential.
  • Impartiality: Review manuscripts objectively without bias related to the author’s identity, institutional affiliation, or geographical location.
  • Constructiveness: Provide feedback that is clear, actionable, and designed to help authors improve their work.
  • Timeliness: Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe to support an efficient editorial process.
  1. Reviewer Selection
  • Expertise Match: Select reviewers with appropriate subject matter expertise for the manuscript's focus.
  • Conflict of Interest: Avoid assigning reviewers who may have personal or professional conflicts of interest with the authors.
  • Diversity Considerations: Strive for diversity in reviewer selection to ensure a broad range of perspectives.
  1. Review Process

Initial Review

  • Ensure that the manuscript aligns with the scope and aims of the publication.
  • Check for compliance with ethical standards and potential plagiarism.

In-Depth Evaluation

  • Assess the originality, significance, and rigor of the research.
  • Evaluate the clarity of the manuscript's structure, argumentation, and presentation.
  • Check the accuracy and relevance of citations and references.

Feedback Preparation

  • Use constructive language to highlight both strengths and areas for improvement.
  • Clearly justify recommendations (accept, minor revision, major revision, reject).
  • Ensure feedback is actionable and specific to help authors improve their work.
  1. Reviewer Communication
  • Guidelines Sharing: Provide reviewers with clear instructions on the review scope and expectations.
  • Deadlines: Set and communicate realistic deadlines for review completion.
  • Acknowledgment: Recognize and appreciate the contribution of reviewers to the peer review process.
  1. Ethical Considerations
  • Ensure that all reviewers disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
  • Monitor and address any cases of inappropriate reviewer conduct.
  1. Post-Review Actions
  • Collation of Feedback: Combine reviewer comments for the authors, ensuring clarity and consistency.
  • Decision-Making: Use reviewer feedback to inform editorial decisions, while considering all aspects of the manuscript.
  1. Continuous Improvement
  • Gather feedback from reviewers and authors on the peer review process.
  • Update review policies and practices regularly to maintain high standards.

This section serves as a comprehensive guide for conducting peer reviews that uphold the quality and reputation of our publications. Should you have questions or require further assistance, please contact the editorial office for support.