Peer Review

1. Introduction

Ell Social Sciences and Humanities Insights u[1] pholds a rigorous and transparent peer review process to maintain academic integrity and ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly works. Every manuscript submitted undergoes a structured peer evaluation to assess its relevance, originality, methodological rigor, and contribution to political science, public policy, and governance studies.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Ell Research Center employs a double-blind peer review system, where both author and reviewer identities are concealed throughout the review process. This mechanism is implemented to ensure neutrality, eliminate potential bias, and promote critical yet constructive academic dialogue.

 

All author-identifying information is removed prior to peer review, and reviewers remain anonymous to authors. This fosters objectivity and academic honesty, ensuring the manuscript is judged solely on its scholarly merit.

3. Peer Review Stages

The peer review process in Ell Social Sciences and Humanities Insights co[2]  mprises three key stages:

Stage I: Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first assessed by the editorial team to determine their suitability for full peer review. The screening includes:

 

1. Plagiarism Check

Using Turnitin software, each manuscript is examined for textual similarity. Manuscripts with a similarity index above 20% will be returned to the author for revision or rejected. Authors will receive a copy of the similarity report with editorial notes.

 

2. Scope and Relevance

The editorial team conducts an initial verification to ensure that the submitted manuscript aligns with the journal’s focus, scope, and objectives. This process includes evaluating the relevance of the topic, the scholarly contribution, and the consistency of the manuscript with the journal’s academic domain. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s thematic scope, academic standards, or publication direction may be rejected at the preliminary stage or recommended for submission to a more suitable journal. This process is essential to maintain the consistency, quality, and integrity of the publication.

 

3. Currency and Relevance of Citations

Authors are expected to reference recent and high-quality sources, particularly within the last five years, to ensure scholarly relevance and engagement with current academic debates.

 

4. Language and Structure

Submissions may be in English. Manuscripts must demonstrate clarity, logical structure, proper grammar, and adherence to journal formatting guidelines. Papers with excessive language issues will be returned for revision.

This initial screening is typically completed within 7 working days. Manuscripts that meet all criteria proceed to the next stage.

Stage II: External Peer Review

Manuscripts approved at the editorial screening are assigned to at least two expert reviewers with specialization in the subject matter. Reviewers may come from the editorial board or external networks in political science, governance, or public policy.

 

Evaluation Criteria:

1.     Originality and contribution to the field

2.     Theoretical and conceptual clarity

3.     Methodological rigor, including qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods

4.     Relevance to political and policy contexts

5.     Clarity of argument and organization

6.     Strength of empirical evidence or case studies

 

Reviewer Recommendations:

  1. Accept with minor revisions
  2. Accept with moderate revisions
  3. Major revisions required
  4. Reject with explanation

 

If conflicting recommendations arise, the manuscript will be sent to a third reviewer for further assessment. All reviewer feedback is anonymized and provided to the author(s).

 

This stage is generally completed within 1 to 4 weeks, depending on reviewer availability.

Stage III: Final Editorial Decision

After the peer review, the editor will evaluate:

1.     The original manuscript

2.     The revised version, if applicable

3.     Reviewer feedback and recommendations

 

Based on this comprehensive assessment, the editor may decide to:

  1. Accept the manuscript as submitted
  2. Accept with minor revisions
  3. Request major revisions
  4. Resubmit for an additional round of peer review
  5. Reject the manuscript

 

Authors will be provided with clear instructions for revision, if needed. In cases requiring further review, revised manuscripts may be sent back to the original reviewers.

 

Accepted manuscripts will be scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue of Ell Research Journals and will enter the copyediting and layout stages in preparation for release.