• Home
• About
• Login
• Register
• Categories
• Search
• Current
• Archives
• Announcements

Peer Review Process

PJDRS utilizes an online submission and review system. Submission and review of all articles must be processed using this system and adhere to the Review Policy Best Practices.

1. The Editorial Board is responsible for article selection and reviewer selection.
2. Each article must be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers.
3. Reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities, and authors are also unaware of the reviewers' identities (double-blind review).
4. The review process will consider novelty, objectivity, methodology, scholarly impact, conclusions, and references.
5. The final decision on article acceptance will be made by the Editorial Board based on critical comments from reviewers.
6. Field editors will make the final decision regarding the submission to the corresponding author based on the reviewers' recommendations.
7. The PJDRS Editorial Board will protect the confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers.

Reviewer Guidelines

Before accepting or declining an invitation to review, consider the following questions:

1. Is the article within your field of expertise? Accept the invitation only if you are confident you can provide a high-quality review.
2. Do you have any potential conflicts of interest? Disclose this to your editor when responding to the invitation.
3. Do you have the time available? Reviewing can be a lengthy task – ensure you can complete it before the deadline.

Respond to review invitations promptly – delaying your decision will slow down the review process, whether you agree to review or not. If you decline the invitation, suggest alternative reviewers.

Review Comments

Your review will assist the editor in deciding whether to publish the article. Providing thorough opinions and observations on an article is crucial. Your comments should be courteous and constructive, without including personal comments or information, including your name.

It's essential to share your understanding of any shortcomings. You should explain and provide reasons supporting your assessment so that the editor and authors fully understand your comments. Indicate whether your comments are your opinion or based on existing data.

Reviewer Checklist

1. Provide your overall impressions of the article, including whether it's novel and compelling, has significant impact, and adds to the knowledge base.
2. Offer specific comments and suggestions, including on layout and format, title, abstract, introduction, methodology, statistical data, results, discussion, conclusions, grammar, and references.
3. If you suspect plagiarism, fraud, or other ethical issues, express your concerns to the editor in as much detail as possible. For further information, visit the PJDRS Publishing Ethics webpage or COPE Guidelines.
4. According to COPE guidelines, reviewers must treat each article they review as confidential. Because peer review is confidential, reviewers must not share their reviews or review information with anyone without the consent of all involved editors and authors. This applies during and after the publication process.
5. Any suggestions that authors should include citations to the reviewer's (or their associates') work must be solely based on scholarly reasons and not to increase citation counts or enhance visibility of the reviewer's (or their associates') work.

The Final Decision

The PJDRS Editor will ultimately decide whether to accept or reject the article. The editor will consider all views and may seek a third opinion or ask authors to revise the article before making the final decision.

Peer Review Policy

PJDRS uses an online submission and review system. Submission and review of all articles must be processed using this system and adhere to the Review Policy Best Practices.

Article Selection

The PJDRS Editorial Board is responsible for ensuring that the peer review process runs smoothly and on schedule. Article selection should be based on the scientific quality of its content, and its topic should clearly fall within the focus and scope of the PJDRS Journal.

Reviewer Selection

The PJDRS Editorial Board will select reviewers with expertise in the relevant scientific field and must check all reviewer disclosures of potential conflicts of interest to determine if bias may exist.

All research articles must be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers, and if necessary, the PJDRS Editorial Board will seek additional opinions by adding a third or subsequent reviewers.

The PJDRS Editorial Board must follow publisher best practice guidelines to avoid unfair peer reviewer selection.

Transparency and Review Process

The review process will consider novelty, objectivity, methodology, scholarly impact, conclusions, and references. Reviewer comments will be sent to the corresponding author for response and necessary action. The Editorial Board will evaluate reviewer comments and then send the final decision on the submission to the corresponding author based on the reviewers' recommendations.

The PJDRS Editorial Board, authors, and reviewers must use the electronic submission system for all journal communications and appropriately utilize PJDRS plagiarism prevention using Turnitin Similarity Check.

Confidentiality

The PJDRS Editorial Board will maintain confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers. The PJDRS Editorial Board will also ensure that reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities, and authors are also unaware of the reviewers' identities (double-blind review).

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

The PJDRS Editorial Board will adhere to the journal's policy regarding disclosure of conflicts of interest made by authors and reviewers.

Authors and reviewers will receive support and guidance from the PJDRS Editorial Board throughout the publication process.