Peer Review Policy and Procedures

Reviewed October 2020

 

Peer Review Policy Statement: The practice of peer review is to ensure that good scholarly work is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is standard practice at all reputable journals. Our editorial executive team (Editor, Production Editor, Sub-Editors- discipline area) together with referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of multi-discipline research and all manuscripts, including those that appear in Special Issues, are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below: (see also the publication flow chart)

STEP 1: Initial manuscript evaluation

Due to the large number of papers submitted each year to this journal (circa 7,000), the Production Editorial Team first evaluates the manuscript for ‘fit’ and ‘compliance’ to the journal’s mission and publication standards. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal.

Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage are usually informed within 8-12 weeks of submission. Papers which are deemed viable but have poor English, grammatical or formatting errors at this stage may be forwarded to third party academic support entities to assist authors to meet our publication standards. Fees are applicable for this service. The journal is committed to equal opportunity. (Statistics to June 2020 indicate a rejection rate of 76%)

STEP 2: Peer Review Processing

To manage the large volume of submissions made each year the journal manages papers by way of discipline area. The Production Editor filters papers to a respective discipline editorial team. Each discipline area is headed by a Sub-Editor, who is an expert in the associated discipline (field of research) and a member of the editorial board. The sub-editor is responsible for managing the peer review process, supported by the Production Editor. The overall process of peer review is managed by the Peer Review Board. This board is a subcommittee of the Editorial Board.

STEP 3: Double Blind Peer Review

Those papers that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least 2 experts for review; these may include members of the Editorial Board from the list of approved journal reviewers. The authors are asked to nominate reviewers to be added to this list. Reviewers are asked to complete a proforma and to indicate reviews that may be required of the paper for publication. 

  • Type of peer review This journal employs double-blind reviewing, where the referees remain anonymous to authors throughout the process.
  • How referees are selected: The journal manages papers in discipline areas. Each discipline area has a sub-editor. Referees are matched to papers according to their expertise and recent reviewing history. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author(s) though these recommendations may or may not be used
  • Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: *is original• is methodologically sound• follows appropriate ethical guidelines• has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions• correctly references previous relevant work. Referees are not expected to correct or copy edit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. A standard report template is used.
  • How long does the review process take? Typically, manuscripts are reviewed within 8- 12 weeks of submission but substantially longer review times are not uncommon, especially for papers on esoteric topics where finding qualified referees can itself take many months. Should the referees' reports contradict one another, or a report is unduly delayed, a further expert opinion is often sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees upon receipt. Referees may and frequently do request more than one revision of a manuscript.

STEP 4: Editorial Board Review / Notification

  • Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript is made by the Peer Review Board of the editorial board and the editor.

STEP 5: Publication

  • Editor's decision is final: Once accepted by the editor, the article is published. An acceptance notification is sent to the author.

Becoming a referee If you are not currently a referee but would like to be added to the list, please contact the editorial office. The benefits of refereeing include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage. You may also be able to cite your work for the journal as part of your professional service contributions. Kindly contact editor@ijicc.net

Academic Support Services: The Journal is committed to equal opportunity and to that end is accepting of authors, especially those from non-English speaking backgrounds, to use third party academic support services to ensure their submission is of the highest quality. Fees may be payable to these entities. Please not that fees charged by Academic Support services are not affiliated with the IJICC and do not garuntee publication. Authors are to assess whether the services are right for them. All article submissions are still subject to the IJICC's strict peer and editorial board review processes. Please email the editor for such service details. editor@ijicc.net