Guidelines & Peer Review Process

 

                                             GUIDELINES ABOUT EDITORIAL REVIEW PROCESS

 

Unlike most journals, where the reviewers' opinion almost absolutely determines the publication of an article, in Ethical Review of Social Sciences the decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) after hearing from at least one Board Member and two Reviewers. In this way, the process does not concentrate the evaluation of the article in the hands of the external Reviewers, but fragments the evaluation among several actors by dividing the weight according to professionalism and keeping most of the evaluation internally by the expert members of the Editorial Team. In this respect, the review follows four stages: From the receipt of the article, the EIC, with the possible support of a Deputy Editor (identified among the Board Members by the EIC), will have five days to assess whether the article is in line with the journal's objectives and whether it needs a more thorough review process. If this is not the case, the EIC will return the proposal to the author(s) giving reasons for the rejection. If the EIC decides that the article merits a full revision, the EIC will assign the article to a Board Member and two External Reviewers, according to their area(s) of expertise, within two working days, with the EIC who will be assigned the task of monitoring the revision stages of the article. Upon receipt of the article, the Board Member and the External Reviewers have twentieight working days to evaluate the paper and recommend a course of action, i.e. to determine whether the article has the right academic and methodological qualities for consideration by the journal. Generally, the recommended course of action is expressed as:
(i) accepting the manuscript,
(ii) accepting it subject to some minor revisions, or
(iii) rejecting it.

The Reviewers' and Board Member's evaluations must be collected by the EIC for review, and the EIC had seven working days to take a decision about the Manuscript, followed by his own opinion based on the recommendations offered during the Review stage. Based on the recommendations, the EIC then has three days to inform the author(s) of the decision made. 

 

The rating scale is as follows:

- 76% - 100% = accept the manuscript (possible request for minor corrections)

- 51% - 75% = accept it subject to some revisions

- 0% - 50% = reject it

 

Thus, while the qualitative recommendation offers a description of the Article, the rating scale offers an immediate framework for the journal's determination of publication.

In this respect, the following formula is used during the evaluation of the Article:

Evaluation Process = (R1*0.25+R2*0.25)+BM*0.5 =

R1 = Reviewer 1

R2 = Reviewer 2

BM = Board Member

 

The evaluation of the Board Member has a higher impact than those of the External Reviewers, so that in the review process most of the final decision is concentrated in the hands of the journal members.