If you are interested in becoming a peer reviewer for the IJPS, please contact the managing editor at Editor@IJPS-Journal.org.
Peer review process
- Peer reviews are double-anonymous; submissions are anonymized prior to being sent to peer reviewers, and peer reviewers remain anonymous to authors prior to and following publication.
- In most cases, reviews are conducted by at least two independent reviewers; editorial board members are only asked to participate in a peer review when they are the best qualified to assess a particular topic or research method.
- Feedback and recommendations provided by all peer reviewers for a submission are consolidated by the managing editor prior to being provided to authors. Anonymized consolidated reviews may be shared with other relevant peer reviewers to ensure they are accurate, coherent, and complete.
- Prior to being provided to an author, the managing editor may edit or provide parenthetical comments within a review to add clarity or provide an author with guidance on how to respond to unprofessional reviewer feedback.
- When there is a conflict between reviewer recommendations, the managing editor may seek input from an additional peer reviewer, an associate editor, a member of the editorial board, or the editor in chief.
- The editor in chief makes the final decision regarding whether to publish a submission.
- Peer review reports are not published.
- Peer reviewers for a particular submission are selected based on their verifiable subject matter expertise, publication history, experience performing peer reviews, and availability.
- Authors may provide the names of individuals who they believe are qualified to review their submission; authors must disclose their relationships (if any) with recommended reviewers, including current or former familial, academic, financial, business, legal, or political relationships.
- Authors may request that certain individuals not be selected to review their submission; authors must provide a valid reason for their request.
- Peer reviews are assessed by the IJPS for quality, objectivity, accuracy, responsiveness, timeliness, and professionalism to ensure only those individuals who provide high-quality reviews are approached to peer review future submissions.
Instructions for reviewers
- Reviewers are asked to respond to an invitation to review a submission within 2 weeks of receiving the invitation.
- Reviewers who accept an invitation are asked to return their review within 3 weeks of receiving a copy of the submission.
- Reviewers must complete the Peer Review Report by answering each question, providing the author with constructive feedback, and providing the managing editor with a recommendation on whether the submission should be published.
- Reviewers must adhere to all ethical responsibilities, including but not limited to those defined in the peer review agreement below.