ISSN registered · Open Access · UGC approved

Home/Peer Review

Peer review process

Every research article we publish is reviewed by independent subject experts before acceptance.

How we review

We use double-blind peer review. Reviewers are not told who the authors are, and authors are not told who reviewed their work. This keeps the assessment focused on the research rather than on reputation, institution or country.

Each manuscript sent out for review is assessed by at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the subject.

The steps

  1. Submission and acknowledgement

    You submit the manuscript and receive a reference number. Keep it for all correspondence.

  2. Editorial screening

    The editor checks scope, structure, language and completeness. Work that is out of scope or badly incomplete is returned at this stage without review.

  3. Similarity check

    The manuscript is screened for text overlap with published literature. See similarity screening.

  4. Reviewer assignment

    The editor invites at least two subject experts. Anyone with a conflict of interest — a co-author, colleague or competitor — is not used.

  5. Review

    Reviewers assess originality, method, evidence, clarity and relevance, and recommend a decision with written comments for the author.

  6. Editorial decision

    The editor weighs the reviews and decides. Reviewers advise; the editor decides.

  7. Revision

    If revisions are requested, you resubmit with a point-by-point response to each comment. Major revisions usually go back to the original reviewers.

  8. Acceptance and publication

    Once accepted, the article is copy-edited, proofed by you, assigned to an issue and published open access.

Possible decisions

AcceptPublishable as submitted. Uncommon on a first submission.
Minor revisionSmall changes needed. Usually checked by the editor alone.
Major revisionSubstantial changes needed. Normally returned to reviewers.
RejectNot suitable for this journal, or the findings are not adequately supported.

Timelines

We aim to work to the following. Actual times vary with reviewer availability.

Editorial screening[e.g. within 7 days of submission]
Peer review[e.g. 4–6 weeks]
First decision[e.g. within 8 weeks]
Publication after acceptance[e.g. 2–4 weeks]

Appeals

If you believe a decision was reached in error, you may appeal once. Write to the editor with your manuscript reference number and a specific, point-by-point explanation of where you think the assessment was mistaken. Appeals are considered by an editor who was not involved in the original decision.

For reviewers

Reviewing is voluntary and central to how research is checked. If you would like to review for us, please register as a reviewer and read the reviewer guidelines.