The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:
– Identity transparency: Double Anonymized
– Reviewer interacts with: Editor
– Review information published: None
Your manuscript will undergo an initial evaluation. If it does not conform to the requirements laid out in these guidelines, it will be returned to you for amendments prior to peer review. Manuscripts may be desk rejected without peer review at this point if they are out of scope for the journal or otherwise unsuitable.
After passing the initial evaluation, your manuscript will then be peer reviewed. We will notify you when a decision has been reached.
The journal’s policy is to have manuscripts reviewed by two expert reviewers. Journal of Eurasian Studies utilizes a double-anonymize peer review process in which the reviewer and authors’ names and information are withheld from the other.
The publisher does not permit the use of author-suggested (recommended) reviewers at any stage of the submission process. Reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Our policy is that reviewers should not be assigned to a paper if:
- The reviewer is based at the same institution as any of the co-authors.
- The reviewer is based at the funding body of the paper.
- The author has recommended the reviewer.
The following manuscript types may not require two independent reviews to be accepted: Editorials, Book Reviews.
To ensure the integrity of the peer review process we assign reviewers and cannot accept author recommendations.
All manuscripts are reviewed as rapidly as possible, while maintaining rigor. Reviewers make comments to the author and recommendations to the Editor who then makes the final decision on all manuscripts, including those appearing in a special issue or special collection. The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in the Journal. In these cases, the peer review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board and the submitting Editor/Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process.
The journal has an Editorial Board and Editorial Review Board who serve the journal as external peer reviewers. Each member of the Editorial Review Board and Editorial Board are active researchers in the field and selected based on strict criteria, ensuring they possess the necessary expertise and experience. The Editor(s) may use one Editorial Review Board member or Editorial Board Member as a reviewer for each manuscript, and will then reach beyond this pool to include additional reviewers to meet the required number before a decision can be made. This ensures a comprehensive and robust peer review process, aligning with our commitment to publish the most credible and valid research. Care is taken not to invite any Editorial Review Board Member or Editorial Board Member that has any potential conflict of interest with any author of the paper.