Peer Review Process
Peer Review Type: Single-blind peer review
In single-blind peer review, reviewer identities remain confidential throughout the review process, while author identities are known to the reviewers. This is the standard peer review model adopted by Journal of Critical Realism in Socio-Economics (JOCRISE), consistent with the practice of leading international peer-reviewed journals.
Journal of Critical Realism in Socio-Economic (JOCRISE) is a single-blind peer-reviewed journal. Every paper submitted to JOCRISE for publication is subject to peer review by one or more individuals of similar competence to the author. In this model, reviewers are informed of the author's identity and affiliation, enabling them to assess the manuscript's contribution within its appropriate scholarly context, while the identity of reviewers is withheld from authors throughout the review process and after publication, unless a reviewer explicitly consents to disclosure. This model is consistent with the peer review practices adopted by many leading international, Scopus-indexed journals, and is designed to protect reviewers from undue influence while preserving accountability and rigor in the evaluation process. The peer review method is employed to maintain standards of quality and provide credibility for published papers.
The peer review at JOCRISE proceeds in 9 steps as follows.
- Submission of Paper
The article is submitted to the journal by the corresponding or submitting author. This is carried out through a web site that the Open Journal System (OJS) supports. However, Jocrise also momentarily takes paper submissions by email to help authors.
- Editorial Office Assessment
The submitted paper is first assessed by the Jocrise's editor. The editor checks whether it is suitable for the Journal's focus and scope. The paper's composition and arrangement are evaluated against the journal's Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. In addition, an assessment of the minimum required quality of the paper for publication begins at this step, including one that assesses whether there is a major methodological flaw. Every submitted paper that passes this step will be checked by Turnitin to measure the similarity index which leads to plagiarism before being reviewed by reviewers.
- Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief
The Editor-in-Chief checks if the paper is appropriate for the journal, sufficiently original, interesting, and significant for publication. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.
- Invitation to Reviewers
The handling editor sends invitations to individuals believed to be appropriate reviewers based on subject expertise, closeness of research interest, and the absence of any conflict of interest. The peer review process at JOCRISE involves a community of qualified experts capable of performing impartial, informed reviews. Reviewers are provided with the full manuscript, including author names and affiliations, to enable a well-contextualized assessment of the work's originality and contribution. To preserve reviewer
independence and protect against retaliation or undue pressure, reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors at any stage of the process.
- Response to Invitations
Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or decline. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for the suggestion of an alternative reviewer, when he or she declines to review.
- Review is Conducted
The reviewers allocate time to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewers may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept, or reject it, or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.
- Journal Evaluates the Reviews
The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor consider all returned reviews before making an overall decision. Where more than one reviewer has been assigned and their assessments differ widely, the handling editor may invite an additional reviewer to obtain a further opinion before making a decision.
- The Decision is Communicated
The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. Reviewer comments are sent anonymously to the corresponding author to take the necessary actions and responses. At this point, reviewers are also sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review.
- Final Steps
If accepted, the paper is sent to copy-editing. Suppose the article is rejected or sent back to the author for either major or minor revision. In that case, the handling editor will include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. The author should make corrections and revise the paper per the reviewers' comments and instructions.
After revision has been made, the author should resubmit the revised paper to the editor.
If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive the revised version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.
If the editor is happy with the revised paper, it is considered to be accepted. The accepted papers will be published online and all are freely available as downloadable pdf files.
