Peer-review and editorial process is a critical process in the publication of academics. It
guarantees that presented manuscripts are of high scholarly standard as regards to quality,
originality, relevancy, and clarity before it is allowed to be published. Even though the exact
text on the peer-review page of the RLSE Journal is not comprehensive, most academic
journals (such as in the field of law and social sciences) possess a standard and transparent
format of the review process and an editorial control.
The following is a straightforward discussion of how such procedures usually take place and
what the writers should expect when presenting to an academic journal such as the RLSE
Journal.
After a manuscript has been received on the online system of the journal, the editorial team
undertakes a preliminary review to ensure:
● Fit of the journal in terms of aims and scope of the manuscript.
● Adherence to formatting and submission regulations.
● Minimal grade of language and presentation.
Papers that fail to satisfy these minimal standards can be desk rejected without being
subjected to outside examination (desk rejection).
The papers which get through the first screening are forwarded to external review. Typically:
● That is no less than two independent reviewers of experts who are chosen on the
basis of subject expertise. .
● Manuscript assessment is done by the reviewers as per the requests of the reviewing
bodies.
● Douple-blind review model is applied in many journals, and no one (author or
reviewer) is aware of other parties to minimize the bias.
Reviewers consider the manuscript in terms of several major standards: during the
peer-review stage:
● Originality and contribution to the field.
● Methodological rigor and data analysis.
● Comprehensibility and arrangement.
● Soundness of conclusions
● Relevance and quality of citation.
The report given by the reviewers normally contains a comprehensive report to the authors
and advice to the editor (accept, revise, or reject).
Upon the receipt of reviewer reports, the Editor-in-Chief or handling editor decides on the
basis of the consideration and suggestions. Ordinary editorial results are:
● Accept without revision
● Accept with minor revisions
● Demand large-scale revisions and resubmission.
● Reject
The editor informs the authors of the decision, as well as of the feedback of the reviewers.
If a revision is requested:
● Authors make changes to the manuscript based on the reviewer and editor
comments.
● Depending on the extent of changes, a revised version can be re-reviewed or
assessed by the editor itself.
● Categorical and summarized answers to comments posted by reviewers can simplify
this process.
The editor accepts the manuscript as a publication upon completion of all the necessary
revisions and when the manuscript conforms to the provisions of the journal. The manuscript
is then taken to production to be formatted, proofread and release.
The High-Level Principles of Peer Review
● Confidentiality: All communications in terms of review are regarded as confidential.
● Objectivity: The assessments should be done on the content rather than on any of
personal or institutional affiliations.
● Transparency: The decision-making process is made open and communicated
through constructive feedback.
● Editorial Independence: There is no way that payment of processing charges has
an effect in editorial decisions.
Peer-review and editorial process The purpose of the peer-review and editorial process is to
provide quality, credibility and fairness of academic publication. The knowledge of such
steps assists the authors to submit more acceptable submissions and to respond to the
review effectively.