Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies (IJPES) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, transparent, independent, and timely peer review process.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo editorial screening and independent peer review before a publication decision is made.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, all manuscripts are evaluated by the Editorial Office and the Editor-in-Chief to determine whether they meet the journal's basic requirements and publication standards.

At this stage, manuscripts are assessed for:

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;

  • Compliance with submission and formatting requirements;

  • Originality and scholarly contribution;

  • Methodological rigor;

  • Ethical compliance;

  • Language quality and readability.

Manuscripts that do not satisfy the journal's minimum academic, methodological, ethical, or editorial standards may be rejected without external peer review.

Assignment for Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening proceed to external peer review.

The Editor-in-Chief, with the support of the editorial team where appropriate, identifies and invites qualified reviewers based on their expertise in the subject area and methodological approach of the manuscript.

The editorial team monitors the review process, evaluates reviewer reports, and supports the Editor-in-Chief in ensuring that the peer review process is fair, rigorous, confidential, and timely.

Double-Blind Peer Review

IJPES operates a double-blind peer review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process.

Authors must ensure that all files submitted for peer review are fully anonymized. Information that may directly reveal the identity of the authors or their institutions should not appear in the manuscript file submitted for review.

Information removed for purposes of anonymization may be restored to the manuscript after acceptance.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected on the basis of their academic expertise, publication record, methodological competence, and familiarity with the subject of the manuscript.

Reviewers may be drawn from:

  • The Editorial Board;

  • The journal's reviewer database;

  • External scholars and experts identified by the Editor-in-Chief or editorial team.

The journal seeks to appoint reviewers who possess relevant expertise and have no personal, professional, institutional, academic, or financial conflicts of interest that could compromise the objectivity of the review.

Each manuscript that proceeds to external peer review is normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers.

Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts according to the following criteria:

  • Originality and contribution to the field;

  • Theoretical foundation and engagement with relevant literature;

  • Research design and methodology;

  • Appropriateness of data analysis;

  • Interpretation of findings;

  • Validity and reliability or trustworthiness of the research;

  • Organization and clarity of presentation;

  • Quality of the discussion and conclusions;

  • Relevance to the journal's aims, scope, and readership;

  • Ethical compliance;

  • Overall scholarly significance.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, evidence-based, and respectful feedback that assists both authors and editors in evaluating and improving the manuscript.

Editorial Decisions

Reviewer recommendations inform editorial decisions but do not determine them. The Editor-in-Chief considers the reviewers' reports together with the manuscript's scholarly quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, originality, and relevance to the journal.

One of the following editorial decisions may be made:

Accept

The manuscript is accepted for publication without further substantive revision.

Minor Revision

The manuscript requires limited revisions before it can be considered for final acceptance.

Major Revision

The manuscript requires substantial revisions before it can be reconsidered for publication. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by additional reviewers when necessary.

Reject

The manuscript is not considered suitable for publication in the journal.

The Editor-in-Chief retains final authority over all editorial decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection.

Revised Manuscripts

Authors submitting a revised manuscript are expected to address the comments and recommendations provided by the reviewers and editors.

Authors should provide a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed and identify the corresponding changes made in the revised manuscript. Where an author chooses not to implement a recommendation, a clear scholarly justification should be provided.

Submission of a revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance.

Review Timeline

IJPES seeks to provide authors with timely editorial decisions while maintaining the rigor and quality of the peer review process.

Review times may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, the number of revision rounds required, and other circumstances associated with scholarly peer review.

Authors can follow the status of their submissions through the journal's online submission system.

Conflicts of Interest in Peer Review

Editors and reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could reasonably be perceived as affecting their objectivity.

Reviewers should decline an invitation to review when they have personal, professional, institutional, academic, or financial relationships that may compromise, or appear to compromise, the impartiality of their evaluation.

When an editor has a conflict of interest concerning a submitted manuscript, responsibility for managing that manuscript will be assigned to another appropriate member of the editorial team.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received by IJPES are treated as confidential documents.

Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose, discuss, distribute, or use information obtained through the peer review process for personal, professional, academic, or financial advantage.

Reviewers must not share manuscripts with third parties or involve other individuals in the review process without prior authorization from the journal.

Appeals

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a significant misunderstanding, factual error, or procedural concern may submit a reasoned appeal to the Editor-in-Chief.

Appeals should clearly explain the grounds for reconsideration and provide a scholarly response to the issues underlying the original decision.

Appeals are evaluated in accordance with the journal's editorial policies and may involve consultation with additional reviewers or members of the editorial team when appropriate. The decision reached following the appeal process is final.

Reviewer Recognition

IJPES highly values the contributions of its reviewers. Peer reviewers play a fundamental role in maintaining the scholarly quality, integrity, and credibility of the journal.

Researchers interested in serving as reviewers may contact the Editorial Office and provide information regarding their areas of expertise, institutional affiliation, publication record, and ORCID identifier.

Contact

Editorial Office
International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies (IJPES)
E-mail: ijpesjournal@gmail.com
Website: www.ijpes.com