Peer-Review-Process

Peer Review Process

The International Journal of Psychology and Therapy (IJPT) follows a rigorous, transparent, and ethically grounded peer review system to ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly work. The journal adopts a double-blind peer review model, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the evaluation process. This approach ensures impartiality, minimises bias, and maintains the integrity of academic assessment in accordance with international standards and best practices.

1. Initial Editorial Screening (Desk Review)

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial office. This stage includes:

  • Assessment of alignment with the journal’s aims and scope
  • Verification of compliance with author guidelines and formatting requirements
  • Plagiarism screening using standard detection tools such as Turnitin or iThenticate
  • Evaluation of ethical compliance, particularly for studies involving human or animal participants

Manuscripts that fail to meet the required standards may be desk-rejected at this stage without external review. This ensures efficiency and maintains the overall quality of submissions.

2. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Demonstrated academic expertise and publication record
  • Relevance of research specialisation to the manuscript topic
  • Absence of conflicts of interest
  • Institutional and professional independence

This ensures that each manuscript is evaluated objectively and from multiple scholarly perspectives.

3. Peer Review Evaluation

Reviewers are expected to provide detailed, constructive, and evidence-based feedback. The evaluation focuses on:

  • Originality and novelty of the research
  • Methodological rigour and validity
  • Theoretical and practical contribution
  • Clarity, organisation, and academic writing quality
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

Based on their assessment, reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Reviewers are encouraged to provide specific suggestions to improve the quality and clarity of the manuscript.

4. Editorial Decision-Making

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned handling editor, based on reviewers’ reports.

  • In cases of conflicting reviewer recommendations, additional reviewers may be consulted
  • Authors receive anonymised reviewer comments along with the editorial decision
  • Revised manuscripts may undergo re-evaluation before final acceptance

The decision process is guided by principles of fairness, academic merit, and methodological soundness.

5. Review Timeline

IJPT is committed to an efficient and timely review process:

  • Initial editorial decision (desk review): 5–7 days
  • Peer review duration: approximately 2–3 weeks
  • Final decision (including revisions): typically within 4–5 weeks

Timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and author responsiveness during revision stages.

6. Ethical Review Workflow

The journal follows a structured review workflow:

  1. Manuscript submission
  2. Initial editorial screening (desk review)
  3. Plagiarism and ethical compliance check
  4. Assignment to external reviewers
  5. Peer review evaluation
  6. Editorial decision (accept/revise/reject)
  7. Revision and re-evaluation (if required)
  8. Final acceptance and publication

This structured process ensures transparency, accountability, and consistency in editorial decision-making.

7. Confidentiality and Ethical Standards

  • All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents
  • Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors
  • Reviewers must not use unpublished material for personal or professional gain
  • Any conflict of interest must be disclosed, and reviewers must decline assignments where impartiality is compromised

The journal adheres to ethical standards consistent with internationally recognised guidelines, including those recommended by COPE.

Final Statement

Through this robust and transparent peer review framework, IJPT ensures the publication of credible, high-quality, and ethically sound research. The journal remains committed to maintaining academic integrity and contributing meaningfully to the advancement of knowledge in psychology and technology.