Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

Submissions are initially assessed by the Editorial Team. If an article fits the scope of the journal and is suitable for peer review, it will be assigned to one or more experts for assessment. Articles are reviewed for content, structure and argument, language and expression, and any ethical considerations (if humans have been used as research subjects). The journal operates a double-blind peer-review process, meaning that authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout. The review process will take approximately 4-6 weeks. Based on reviewer reports, the Editor will make a recommendation for acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions/resubmission, or rejection. 

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are asked to provide comment on the below topics and guidelines:

  • Content: Does the article fit within the scope of the journal? Is the submission original, relevant and rigorous? Is the author’s depth of understanding of the issues researched adequate? Are the sources and references adequate? Has the existing knowledge base been explored and built upon? Are the chosen methodologies appropriate and have they and the evidential base been appropriately used? Does the conclusion reflect the argument in the main body text and bring something new to the debate?
  • Structure and argument: Does the abstract summarise the arguments in a succinct and accurate way? Is the manuscript logically structured and do the arguments flow coherently? Is there enough reference to methodology in the introduction and are the arguments fully evidenced and substantiated? Does the introduction signpost the arguments in the logical way and does the conclusion adequately summarise them?
  • Figures/tables: Does the author’s use of tables, charts, figures or maps illustrate the arguments and support the evidential base? Is the quality of the formatting and presentation adequate?
  • Formatting: Does the submitted file adhere to the general author guidelines listed for the journal? Are the citations and references formatted to house-style?
  • Language: Is the text well written and jargon free? Please comment on the quality of English and need for grammatical improvement.
  • Data availability: Has data used in the study been adequately described and made available? Is the data curated in a usable format? Is there a 'Data Availability' statement providing information on how to access the data?

Section Policies

Academic article

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Interview

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Review article

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Editorial

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Quick links