Peer Review Policy

Peer review is central to the quality and credibility of everything we publish. This policy explains how the process works.

Type of Review

All research and review articles submitted undergo Double-anonymised review, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are withheld from one another throughout the process. This supports impartial assessment based on the work itself. To make this possible, authors must submit an anonymised manuscript together with a separate title page, as set out in the Author Guidelines.

The Review Process

1. Initial editorial check: The Editors assess each submission for scope, originality and compliance with the Author Guidelines. Manuscripts that fall outside the journal’s scope or do not meet basic standards may be returned without full review.
2. Assignment to reviewers: Suitable manuscripts are sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.
3. Review: Reviewers assess the manuscript’s originality, significance, methodology and argument, use of evidence, clarity and contribution to the field and recommend a decision.
4. Editorial decision: Based on the reviews, the editors reach a decision: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject. The editors’ decision is final.
5. Revision: Where revisions are required, authors respond to each reviewer comment and resubmit. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for a further assessment.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers consider whether the manuscript:

• Addresses a clear and relevant question or problem
• Is original and contributes to existing scholarship
• Uses sound methodology or a well-reasoned argument
• Supports its claims with appropriate evidence and accurate citations
• Is clearly written and well organised
• Complies with ethical standards

Timeframe

We aim to provide an initial decision within 4 – 8 weeks of submission. Timelines may vary with reviewer availability and the extent of revisions required.

Confidentiality and Integrity

All manuscripts are treated as confidential throughout review. Reviewers and editors must declare any conflict of interest and withdraw from handling a manuscript where one exists. Reviewers must not use or share any part of an unpublished manuscript.