Peer Review at East Journals

Introduction Peer review ensures the credibility of an article. At East Journals, we pride ourselves on a stringent peer review process. All submitted articles undergo meticulous evaluation prior to publication.

Double Blind Peer Review The review process is paramount to the value of a publication. It assists authors in refining their manuscripts while aiding our editorial team in making informed decisions. East Journals adheres to a double-blind peer review system.

In this system, both the author and reviewer remain anonymous to each other. The manuscript is stripped of any identifying information before being dispatched to the reviewer. Similarly, the author remains unaware of the reviewer’s identity when receiving feedback.

We at East Journals believe this approach curtails biases and ensures a balanced and fair assessment.

Our Review Process We utilize a three-tier review system: preliminary editorial evaluation, external assessment, and a final editorial decision.

Initially, the editorial team scans the manuscript to confirm it aligns with our guidelines. This scrutiny includes:

  1. Plagiarism Check: We employ advanced software tools to identify similarities with existing publications. High similarity indices result in immediate rejection, with a detailed report provided to the author.
  2. Relevance: Articles must be pertinent to our focus areas in African and Middle Eastern studies.
  3. Recent Citations: We advocate for references to recent studies, especially articles published within the last five years.
  4. Language Proficiency: Given our global readership, we exclusively publish in English. Clarity, coherence, and adherence to our style guide are imperative.

Articles that don’t meet these criteria are returned for revision. Typically, this initial stage concludes within a week.

Once past the initial review, the manuscript enters the double-blind review phase. A minimum of two external reviewers, with expertise in the subject, are chosen to evaluate it.

The reviewers’ insights help authors enhance their manuscript’s quality. Though one reviewer might endorse a manuscript, dissenting views from another reviewer could lead to its rejection.

Post-review, authors revise their articles based on the feedback. Thereafter, the final review stage commences. The entire portfolio – original, revised manuscripts, and reviewers’ notes – is presented to a senior editor. The editor then finalizes the decision, which can range from immediate acceptance to rejection.

Accepted manuscripts proceed to the publication phase. Those requiring modifications are returned to authors for necessary amendments. In certain instances, a manuscript might undergo multiple iterations of reviews before being deemed fit for publication.