Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

1. Submission:

  • Author Submission: The author submits the manuscript through the journal's online submission system, including all required materials (e.g., cover letter, manuscript, references, figures).
  • Initial Checks: The editorial office performs an initial review to ensure the manuscript adheres to the journal's submission guidelines (e.g., formatting, scope).

2. Preliminary Review:

  • Editor-in-Chief Review: The Editor-in-Chief (or managing editor) assesses whether the manuscript fits within the journal’s scope and whether it is of sufficient quality to proceed to peer review.
  • Desk Rejection: If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or scope, it may be rejected at this stage without external review.

3. Reviewer Selection:

  • Finding Reviewers: If the manuscript passes preliminary review, the editor selects suitable reviewers based on their expertise and relevance to the manuscript’s topic.
  • Reviewer Invitation: Reviewers are invited to review the manuscript. They are asked to confirm their availability and to disclose any conflicts of interest.

4. Review Process:

  • Review Period: Reviewers are given a set period (usually 2-4 weeks) to read the manuscript and provide feedback. They assess the manuscript’s originality, methodology, significance, and clarity.
  • Reviewer Feedback: Reviewers submit their evaluations, including recommendations for revisions, acceptance, or rejection. They may also provide constructive comments to help the authors improve their work.

5. Decision Making:

  • Editorial Decision: The editor (or editorial board) reviews the feedback from the reviewers and makes a decision regarding the manuscript. Decisions can be:
    • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication as is or with minor revisions.
    • Revise and Resubmit: The manuscript requires revisions based on reviewer comments. Authors are invited to make changes and resubmit the manuscript.
    • Reject: The manuscript is rejected, usually with feedback explaining the reasons for rejection.

6. Revision Process:

  • Author Revisions: If revisions are requested, authors revise the manuscript and resubmit it along with a detailed response to each reviewer’s comments.
  • Re-Review: Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the original reviewers or new reviewers for further evaluation.

7. Final Decision:

  • Final Review: The editor reviews the revised manuscript and the responses to the reviewers’ comments to make a final decision.
  • Acceptance: If the manuscript meets the journal’s standards after revisions, it is accepted for publication.
  • Further Revisions: If additional changes are needed, the manuscript may be sent back to the authors for further revisions.

8. Publication:

  • Proofreading: Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes final proofreading and formatting to ensure it meets the journal’s style guidelines.
  • Publication: The manuscript is published in an upcoming issue of the journal, and the authors are notified.

9. Post-Publication:

  • Feedback and Corrections: After publication, readers may provide additional feedback. Any necessary corrections or updates to the published work can be addressed through errata or corrigenda if needed.

10. Ethical Considerations:

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors must maintain confidentiality throughout the process.
  • Conflict of Interest: All parties involved must disclose any conflicts of interest to ensure impartiality.

Notes:

  • Reviewer Guidelines: Clear guidelines and criteria should be provided to reviewers to ensure consistent and fair evaluations.
  • Transparency: The process should be transparent, with clear communication between the journal, authors, and reviewers.

This process helps maintain the integrity and quality of the research published in the Journal of Social and Political Science Research