IEC / Peer Review Practice
Peer Review Practice
Intellectual Edge Consultancy follows a rigorous peer review policy for all publications (books, journal articles, book chapters, reports) and other publishing projects.
IEC follows a blind peer review policy in selecting the books for publication. The book proposals are reviewed by two external reviewers and the manuscript is reviewed by the editors. Book Series editors both screen the initial proposals and the final manuscripts.
The journals published by IEC are subject to double-blind peer review, except The Commentaries and The Agonist, which follow the editorial review and blind review. Submitted manuscripts are reviewed by the Journal editor or associate editors or area editors. Papers may be desk-rejected at this stage. If the manuscript is considered to be of standard quality, it is then sent to at least two external reviewers. Once all reviews are received, the editors make a decision whether to publish, request revisions, or reject the manuscript.
Projects undertaken within and/or with the support of Transnational Press London are reviewed by members of the Advisory Board assigned by cognate areas and the outcomes including the publications and reports are approved by the chair of the board.
Peer-review of Books and Journal Articles
We value peer review which is a process where peer experts evaluate the quality of others’ work. The purpose is to ensure the work is rigorous, coherent, uses past research and there is a clear added value to the knowledge in a particular field.
It also helps the editors to select higher quality articles for publication. Peer review also ensures the integrity of the publishing process. Perhaps one of the greatest added value of the peer review process is that it gives authors access to expert opinions in the field as well as useful critical insight into the methods and models used (or can be used) in the study.
- Editorial review – means the work is reviewed by one or more editors who are experts in the field and the identity of the reviewing editor(s) is not disclosed to the author(s).
- Blind peer review – means the identity of the reviewer is not disclosed to the author(s).
- Double-blind peer review – means neither the author(s) nor the reviewers know the identity of each other.
- Open peer review – both reviewer’s and author(s) names are disclosed. In this type of review practice, often journals are expected to publish the reviewers’ names alongside the article.
Full Review Guideline
Oxbridge Publishing House aim to provide platforms for research, scholarship, and debates in the respective fields the journals or books or conferences cover. Our journals and books cover a great range of social sciences and humanities subjects. They target both specialist audiences and the wider public interested in these debates and research. Articles are directed to scholars, researchers, students, policymakers, practitioners and professionals who work and/or are interested in cognate fields.
Our reviewers elected to serve because of their knowledge and expertise in respective subject areas. Reviewers can be selected from the editorial boards, author databases, and external databases depending on needs for expertise.
Every submitted article in our journals is reviewed by at least two experts in the subject area. Unfortunately, some articles are desk rejected prior to peer review for various reasons. This could be the case if the submission falls outside the scope of a journal; or poor quality of presentation; or major issues identified by editorial teams.