Review Process

Eurasian Journal of Gender Studies (EJGS) editorial board adheres to the recommendations of the COPE’s (Committee on Publication Ethics) when working with manuscripts, reviewers and when organizing the review process.

The review process for EJGS is rigorous and thorough to ensure the highest quality of published articles. The process begins when an author submits their manuscript to the editorial board of the journal. The submission must follow the guidelines provided on the journal's website. The manuscript should be original and should not have been published elsewhere or submitted for publication in another journal.

Double-blind peer-review process

The editorial board checks the manuscript for adherence to the journal's guidelines and policies.  Editors conduct an initial review to determine whether the manuscript meets the journal's scope and standards. If the manuscript passes the initial review, it undergoes a double-blind peer-review process

The review process is double-blinded, meaning that the identity of the authors and reviewers is not revealed to each other. This ensures an impartial assessment of the manuscript and avoids potential biases. The double-blinded blinded review process is also designed to ensure that the manuscript is evaluated solely on its academic merit.

The double-blind peer-review process ensures that the manuscript's authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. The reviewers are experts in the field of the manuscript, and they evaluate the manuscript's quality, originality, relevance, and potential contribution to the field. The reviewers provide constructive feedback to the author to improve the manuscript's clarity, coherence, and quality. In addition, EJGS has policies in place to prevent plagiarism and promote academic integrity. Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are original and have not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. The journal uses plagiarism detection software to ensure that all submissions are original and do not contain any instances of plagiarism or copyright infringement. In cases where plagiarism is identified, the manuscript will be rejected, and the author will be barred from submitting any future articles to the journal.

Review period

The review process in the journal takes on average, from 1 to 3 months but can be changed during the editorial process. During this period, the editorial board of the journal includes time for the initial review of the manuscript, the selection of reviewers, time for the preparation of the review, time for the revision of the article by the author and re-reviewing, and the involvement of additional experts.

Steps of the review process

Upon receipt of a submission, the editorial board reviews it to ensure that it meets the scope and aims of the journal. If the submission is deemed suitable, it is then assigned to two or more independent reviewers who are experts in the field. The reviewers evaluate the submission based on the following criteria:

(1) Originality and significance of the research question.

(2) Soundness of the research methodology.

(3) Clarity and coherence of the writing.

(4) Quality of the analysis and interpretation of the results.

(5) Relevance and contribution to the field of study.

Based on the reviewers' feedback, the editorial board makes a decision on the manuscript's acceptability for publication. The editorial board can decide to accept the manuscript for publication, reject it, or ask the author to make revisions based on the reviewers' feedback.

The possible outcomes of the review process include:

(1) Acceptance: If the manuscript is accepted, it will be published in the journal's next available issue. However, the authors may be asked to make minor revisions and corrections to the manuscript based on the reviewers' comments.

(2) Minor revision: If the manuscript requires minor revisions, the authors will be asked to address the reviewers' comments and resubmit the revised manuscript. The revised manuscript will then be reviewed by the same reviewers, who will determine whether the revisions have been adequately addressed.

(3) Major revision: If the manuscript requires major revisions, the authors will be asked to make significant changes to the manuscript, and the revised manuscript will be resubmitted for another round of peer review.

(4) Rejection: If the manuscript is not accepted for publication, the authors will be informed of the decision and given a detailed explanation of the reasons for rejection.

If the editorial board decides to ask the author to make revisions, the author has to submit a revised manuscript that incorporates the reviewers' feedback. The revised manuscript undergoes another round of review, and the editorial board makes a final decision on whether to accept it for publication.

The review process for EJGS aims to ensure that the published articles are of high quality and meet the journal's scope and standards. The process is also designed to provide constructive feedback to the authors, helping them improve the quality of their manuscripts. In addition to the rigorous review process, EJGS has several policies in place to ensure the fairness, transparency, and integrity of the review process.

Conflict of interest

The editorial board recognizes the importance of managing conflicts of interest to maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of the journal's publications. As such, the journal has established a  conflict of interest policy that applies to all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, reviewers, and members of the editorial board.

Authors must disclose all financial, personal, or professional interests that could be perceived as a conflict of interest. This includes, but is not limited to, funding sources, potential conflicts with a reviewer, competing commercial or personal interests, and any other factors that could affect the objectivity of the research or publication. Disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest is mandatory during the submission process and may be published along with the article if deemed necessary by the editorial board.

Editors and reviewers must also disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may arise during the publication process. This includes any personal or professional relationships with the authors or any competing commercial or personal interests that could affect their objectivity in reviewing or assessing the manuscript. The editorial board will take all steps necessary to ensure that the reviewers and editors are impartial and unbiased in their evaluations.

In cases where a conflict of interest is identified, the editorial board will take appropriate action to manage the conflict of interest and ensure the integrity of the publication process. This may include removing an author, editor, or reviewer from the process or disclosing the potential conflict of interest to the publication’s readers.

Composition of reviewers

Another policy that EJGS has in place to ensure the quality of the review process is the selection of reviewers. The composition of reviewers in EJGS includes well-known scholars and practitioners from various countries who possess expertise in various domains. Reviewers are selected based on their subject matter expertise, educational and research experience, and prior experience as a peer reviewers.

The editorial board of EJGS is responsible for selecting reviewers for each manuscript based on their field of expertise. The reviewers are selected from a diverse pool of academics and practitioners who have significant experience in the field. The selection process ensures that the reviewers are objective, fair, and possess the necessary skills to evaluate the quality of the research.

The reviewers provide a comprehensive and unbiased assessment of the manuscript based on the quality of research, methodology, relevance, originality, and potential impact of the study. The reviewers provide constructive feedback to the authors to improve the quality of the manuscript.

The composition of the reviewers is kept confidential to ensure their impartiality and integrity. The names of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors or any other third party. EJGS maintains a strict policy on the confidentiality of the peer review process.

The principles of selecting reviewers for EJGS are designed to ensure high-quality expertise and fair assessment of manuscripts. Reviewers are chosen based on their expertise, experience, and publications in the relevant fields. The editorial board is responsible for selecting and inviting reviewers, who are typically experts in their respective fields and have published in peer-reviewed journals.

In conclusion, the review process for EJGS is rigorous and thorough, designed to ensure the highest quality of published articles. The journal maintains policies to ensure the fairness, transparency, and integrity of the review process, including the conflict of interest policy, the selection of reviewers, and strict ethical guidelines.

April 15, 2024 (policy update)