Peer Review Policy

Journal of Religion, Local Politics, and Law

1.0 Peer Review Principles and Aims

The Journal of Religion, Local Politics, and Law employs a double-blind peer review system for all manuscripts submitted as research articles. This policy is designed to ensure the academic quality, objectivity, and scholarly integrity of every published article. The purpose of peer review is to provide critical, constructive, and timely evaluation by experts in the relevant fields, to assist the Editors in making editorial decisions and to help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts.

2.0 Review Process and Participants

  • 2.1 Process Initiation: After a manuscript passes the initial screening by the Editor for scope, basic writing standards, and publication ethics, it will be sent to a minimum of two (2) reviewers who are experts in the specific field of the manuscript's topic.

  • 2.2 Confidentiality (Double-Blind): The identities of the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential from each other throughout the review process. All documents and communications must uphold this principle of confidentiality.

  • 2.3 Role of the Editorial Board: The Editorial Board provides insight, advice, and guidance to the Editor-in-Chief. They may also be suggested as reviewers or assist in identifying competent reviewers. The final decision on manuscript acceptance rests with the Editor-in-Chief, based on reviewer recommendations and editorial judgment.

  • 2.4 Role of Editorial Staff: The Managing Editor and Editorial Assistants provide full administrative support in managing the peer review process, safeguarding the integrity of the system, and ensuring efficiency and timeliness for authors, reviewers, and editors.

3.0 Reviewer Assessment Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Originality and Contribution: The novelty of the research and the significance of its contribution to the fields of religion, local politics, and law.

  • Scope and Relevance: The relevance of the topic to the journal's focus and aims.

  • Methodology: The appropriateness, rigor, and clarity of the research methods employed.

  • Analysis and Argumentation: The depth of analysis, coherence of argument, and support from data/empirical evidence.

  • References and Literature: The adequacy and currency of the cited literature.

  • Clarity and Structure: The organization of the manuscript, clarity of presentation, and language quality.

4.0 Review Outcomes and Editorial Decision

  • 4.1 Reviewer Recommendations: Reviewers will provide a recommendation of: (1) Accept without revision, (2) Accept with minor revisions, (3) Accept with major revisions, or (4) Reject.

  • 4.2 Editor's Decision: The Editor-in-Chief will make the final decision based on the reviewers' recommendations and comments. Decisions may be:

    • Accept

    • Minor Revisions Required

    • Major Revisions Required

    • Reject
      The Editor reserves the right to seek additional reviews if necessary.

  • 4.3 Communication with Authors: Authors will be promptly notified of the editorial decision along with the anonymized reviewer comments (where applicable). Authors invited to submit a revised manuscript must address all points raised in a point-by-point response letter and highlight changes in the manuscript.

5.0 Timeline and Efficiency

We are committed to maintaining a reasonable and efficient review timeframe. Reviewers are requested to complete their evaluations within the allotted period to ensure timely feedback to authors. This discipline is crucial for driving the publication process and maintaining overall efficiency. The editorial team monitors the process to avoid unnecessary delays.

6.0 Ethical Guidelines

All participants in the peer review process—authors, reviewers, and editors—are expected to adhere to the highest standards of publication ethics as outlined in our Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement, including confidentiality, objectivity, disclosure of conflicts of interest, and originality of work.

This policy is enacted to uphold the scholarly standard of the Journal of Religion, Local Politics, and Law.