Peer Review Process
Peer-Review Process
Communica: Journal of Communication follows a rigorous and transparent review process to ensure the quality and credibility of the published articles. The journal adopts a double-blind (double-anonymous) peer-review type, where the identities of both the authors and reviewers are kept anonymous during the review process.
Submission and Initial Evaluation
All manuscripts submitted to Communica: Journal of Communication undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial team to assess their suitability and compliance with the journal's scope and guidelines. Manuscripts that pass the initial evaluation are assigned a unique identification number for further processing. The Editor-in-Chief screens each submitted manuscript to ensure its conformity to the journal's focus and scope. Based on the article's field, an editor is assigned to handle the manuscript.
Peer Review
Each eligible manuscript is then sent for review to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers in the relevant field. Reviewers are carefully selected based on their expertise, experience, and prior contributions to the field. In cases where conflicting opinions arise, additional reviewers may be assigned to provide a comprehensive evaluation.
Double-Blind Review
Communica: Journal of Communication ensures a double-blind (double-anonymous) peer-review process, where the identities of both the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. This helps maintain objectivity and fairness in the evaluation process, minimizing potential biases.
Review Criteria
Reviewers are requested to assess the submitted manuscripts based on their scientific quality, originality, relevance to the journal's scope, clarity of presentation, and adherence to ethical guidelines. Constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement are encouraged to assist the authors in enhancing the quality of their work.
Review Duration
Communica: Journal of Communication strives to provide timely and efficient peer review. Reviewers are typically given a specific timeframe to complete their evaluations. Authors will be informed of the review process's estimated duration during the initial submission or after any significant revisions.
Decision Making
The journal requires at least two expert reviews before making a decision. Possible outcomes include:
- Rejection
- Request for minor revisions
- Request for major revisions
- Acceptance without changes
Recommendation for resubmission (for substantial content or language modifications)
In cases where significant discrepancies arise between reviewers’ opinions, a third reviewer may be engaged to provide additional insights. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance, considering the handling editor's recommendations and with approval from the editorial board.
Revision Phase
For manuscripts requiring revisions, authors are given a three-week window to modify and resubmit their work. The handling editor reassesses the revised manuscript to ensure that the changes adequately address reviewers’ comments and suggestions. If necessary, further revision cycles may be initiated to meet the journal's high standards.
Final Verdict
At the final stage, the revised manuscript is assessed for a binary outcome: acceptance or rejection. The handling editor’s evaluation of the manuscript’s improvements determines whether it meets the publication standards of Communica: Journal of Communication. Manuscripts that fail to incorporate the required changes or do not meet the journal’s quality benchmarks are rejected.
Confidentiality
Communica: Journal of Communication maintains strict confidentiality throughout the peer review process. Reviewers are required to treat the manuscripts and their contents as confidential documents and must not disclose any information to unauthorized individuals.
Review Process Improvement
Communica: Journal of Communication continuously seeks to improve its review process. Authors and reviewers' feedback are invaluable in this endeavor. The journal welcomes constructive feedback and suggestions to enhance the efficiency and fairness of the review process.
Contact
For any inquiries or questions related to the review process, please contact the editorial team at journal@idscipub.com
