Peer Review Process

– ERMIS Journals

ERMIS Journals are committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and scholarly excellence. All submitted manuscripts are considered for publication with the understanding that:

  • The content is original, has not been previously published, and is not under review elsewhere.

  • The manuscript does not contain any form of misconduct, including plagiarism, duplication, data fabrication, or falsification.

The peer review process is central to ensuring the scientific quality and relevance of published work. Below is an overview of the peer review process followed by ERMIS Journals.

1. Initial Submission & Editorial Screening

  • Manuscripts must be submitted through the journal’s online submission system.

  • Upon receipt, submissions are reviewed by the editorial office to assess:

    • Completeness and compliance with submission guidelines.

    • Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope.

    • Ethical concerns, methodological soundness, and overall quality.

  • A plagiarism check is conducted using Turnitin:

    • Plagiarism > 30%: The manuscript is automatically rejected.

    • Plagiarism between 15–30%: The manuscript is returned for revision.

    • Plagiarism ≤ 15%: The manuscript proceeds to peer review.

Submissions that do not meet the journal’s basic requirements may be desk-rejected or returned for preliminary corrections before entering the peer review phase.

2. Assignment of Reviewers

  • Manuscripts that pass the editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

  • Reviewers are selected based on:

    • Academic credentials.

    • Review experience.

    • Familiarity with the manuscript topic.

  • ERMIS Journals may use a single-blind or double-blind peer review system:

    • Single-blind: Reviewers know the identity of authors.

    • Double-blind: Both reviewers and authors remain anonymous.

3. Reviewer Evaluation

  • Reviewers are provided with structured guidelines to assess:

    • Originality and significance of the work.

    • Clarity and coherence of the manuscript.

    • Methodological soundness.

    • Validity of data and conclusions.

    • Ethical integrity, including proper citation and avoidance of plagiarism.

  • Reviewers provide a detailed report along with one of the following recommendations:

    • Accept

    • Minor revisions

    • Major revisions

    • Reject

  • In cases of conflicting recommendations, the editorial team may:

    • Seek a third independent review, or

    • Consult a senior editor for final adjudication.

4. Author Revisions

  • Authors receiving reviewer comments are expected to:

    • Revise the manuscript accordingly.

    • Submit a detailed response letter addressing each point raised by the reviewers.

    • Justify any deviations from reviewer suggestions.

  • Revised manuscripts may be:

    • Re-evaluated by the original reviewers.

    • Reviewed by the editorial team for completeness and adequacy.

Multiple rounds of revisions may be requested until all concerns are addressed satisfactorily.

5. Final Decision

  • The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors make the final decision based on:

    • Reviewer recommendations.

    • Quality of the revisions.

    • Overall contribution to the field.

  • Final decisions include:

    • Acceptance

    • Conditional acceptance with minor edits

    • Further revisions

    • Rejection

  • Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage for:

    • Copyediting

    • Typesetting

    • Proofreading

Authors will receive final proofs for approval before publication.

6. Publication

  • Once finalized, the article is published in the next available issue of the journal.

  • ERMIS Journals offer open access options, ensuring wide visibility and accessibility of published research.

7. Post-Publication Review

  • ERMIS Journals encourage post-publication engagement. Readers and scholars may comment on published articles, fostering scholarly dialogue and continual improvement of research quality.

8. Complaints and Appeals

Peer Review Timeline

  • ERMIS Journals are committed to a rigorous yet timely peer review process.

  • Authors can expect to receive initial editorial decisions and reviewer feedback within 2 months of submission.

  • Final Acceptance Letters are issued once all revisions and ethical checks are completed.

  • The journal publishes articles on a rolling (continuous) basis for timely dissemination of research.