Peer Review Guidelines
This journal follows a double-blind peer review model. In line with the aims and mission of the journal, papers are normally peer reviewed by two independent academic experts, and additional or supplementary reviews by experts from the policy community may be sought to ensure high-quality, impactful publications that are both academically rigorous and policy relevant.
When a manuscript is submitted to IJIRG journal it passes through a number of steps:
(1) First, the manuscript is assessed by the Editorial Office to check ifthe manuscript adheres to the journal guidelines. If there are any problems the manuscript will be unsubmitted and returned to the author to be corrected.
(2) The manuscript is then passed to a Senior Editor who checks if the manuscript fits within the journal’s scope and is of interest to the broad readership of the journal. The Editor will either reject the manuscript or pass it onto an Associate Editor.
(3) The Associate Editor checks that the research is scientifically rigorous and that the manuscript is of interest to the specific subject area. The Associate Editor then makes a recommendation to the Editor to reject the manuscript, selects appropriate reviewers, or occasionally will ask the author to make revisions before sending it for review.
(4) In general, two reviewers who are having expertise in respective subjects are sought who analyze the work submitted in the manuscript in detail and write a report.
(5) The Associate Editor after evaluating the comment/ remarks of the reviewers writes a recommendation to the Editor. Associate Editors are encouraged to make a recommendation within 5 days.
(6) The Editor evaluates the Associate Editors recommendation and the reviewer reports and makes a decision. Once a recommendation has been received Editors aim to make a decision on a manuscript within 7 days.
The total review process is generally expected to take 50 days. The dedicated Editorial Office staff tries to minimize delays and is on hand to answer any queries.