Peer review policy

For maintaining the quality and credibility of published research the EJI publisher implement the following policy:

  1. Each received manuscript is initially reviewed by the journal’s editorial team to ensure that its subject is within the scope and standards of the journal.
  2. We select suitable reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript subject. We normally select two reviewers for each manuscript. The reviewers are selected based on their knowledge, experience, and previous work.
  3. Reviewers are then invited to assess the manuscript. They must declare any potential conflicts of interest and confirm their availability to complete the review within the anticipated timeframe.
  4. Reviewers conduct their thorough evaluation of the manuscript. The review is focused on the originality and significance of the research, clarity and validity of the methodology, soundness of the data and results, relevance and rationality of the discussion and conclusions, and the quality of writing and adherence to submission guidelines.
  5. EJI editors encourage peer reviewers to consider ethical issues of the research under revision. They may request additional information from authors if they feel this is required.
  6. Reviewers provide detailed, constructive reports and recommend one of the following actions: accept without revisions, accept with minor revisions, revise and resubmit (if major revisions are required), or reject.
  7. Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the editorial team makes a final decision on the manuscript. Authors are notified of the decision and provided with the reviewers’ comments.
  8. In case that revisions are required, authors are given an opportunity to address the reviewers’ comments and resubmit their manuscript. The revised manuscript may be subject to further review.
  9. Once the manuscript meets all necessary criteria and revisions are satisfactorily addressed, the manuscript is accepted for publication. Authors are notified of the final decision.
  10. Authors who believe that their manuscript was unfairly rejected may appeal the decision. Appeals must be submitted in writing, detailing the rational reasons for the appeal.