Peer Review Process
GJILT employs a rigorous and transparent double-blind peer review process to ensure that every published article meets the highest scientific standards. All manuscripts are independently evaluated by at least two expert reviewers with relevant expertise.
Overview
|
Review Type Double-blind |
Minimum Reviewers 2 independent experts |
Decision Authority Editor-in-Chief |
Estimated Duration 6 – 10 weeks |
Review Stages
|
1
|
Initial Editorial Screening Submitted manuscripts are checked by the editor for relevance to the journal's scope, completeness of files, and basic formatting requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet initial criteria are returned without further review. |
|
2
|
Plagiarism Check All manuscripts that pass initial screening are checked using industry-standard plagiarism detection tools before being forwarded to reviewers. |
|
3
|
Double-Blind Peer Review The manuscript is sent to at least two independent reviewers. Author and reviewer identities remain concealed throughout the process. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on originality, methodology, depth of analysis, and relevance of findings. |
|
4
|
Editorial Decision Based on reviewer recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief will issue one of four decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. The decision and feedback are communicated to the authors. |
|
5
|
Revision & Re-Review Authors requested to revise their manuscript must submit a revised version along with a point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation if required. |
|
6
|
Final Acceptance & Production Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage, including copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading, before |
