The review process

Submissions to E-JournALL are reviewed by two experts in the field using double-blind peer review. If the two reports express contrasting opinions (one recommends the paper for publication, and the other rejects it), a third review may be solicited.


Figure 1. The double-blind peer-review process


Editor quality check: The editors will determine if the article is of sufficient quality and appropriate content. In particular, they will check if the paper is consistent with the scope of E-JournALL and if the language quality follows the standards required for academic publications. If the paper does not demonstrate these basic characteristics, it will be rejected within 2 weeks from the initial submission without going through the double-blind peer-review process.

Double-blind peer-review: The paper will be sent to two experts in the field who will write a report evaluating the scientific quality of the paper. This process is likely to take up to 3 months, and the outcome of the peer review will be one of the following:

a) Acceptance, the paper will be published with the need for only minor revisions or as it is, without need of revisions, corrections, or changes;

b) Conditional acceptance, in which case the author will be required to revise the paper paying attention to the reviewers’ suggestions and comments, and then resubmit it in order to get a final acceptance;

c) Rejection. If both reviewers write negative reports, the editors will send a rejection letter to the author and will attach reviewers’ reports.