Peer Review Policy

Introduction

Globisteme International Journal (GIJ) follows a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, integrity, and academic significance of all published research. The journal is committed to maintaining high scholarly publishing standards through a fair, transparent, and unbiased review system.

Type of Peer Review

GIJ follows a Double-Blind Peer Review process in which:

  • The identities of authors are concealed from reviewers.

  • The identities of reviewers are concealed from authors.

This process helps maintain objectivity and ensures independent evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editorial Office or Editor-in-Chief to determine:

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

  • Originality and academic quality

  • Compliance with submission guidelines

  • Ethical standards and plagiarism requirements

  • Language clarity and formatting quality

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal requirements may be rejected before peer review.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Subject expertise

  • Research background

  • Publication experience

  • Academic qualifications

  • Absence of conflicts of interest

The Editorial Board may invite external experts and independent scholars to review manuscripts when necessary.

Review Process

During the peer-review process, reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality of the research

  • Scientific and academic contribution

  • Research methodology

  • Data analysis and interpretation

  • Clarity and organization

  • Relevance of references

  • Ethical compliance

  • Overall quality and significance

Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept Submission

  • Accept with Minor Revisions

  • Accept with Major Revisions

  • Resubmit for Review

  • Reject Submission

Revision Process

Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts according to reviewer comments and editorial suggestions. Revised submissions should include:

  • A corrected manuscript

  • A detailed response to reviewer comments

Failure to submit revisions within the specified timeline may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from the review process.

Final Decision

The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board after considering reviewer recommendations and editorial evaluations.

The editorial decision is final.

Review Timeline

GIJ aims to complete the peer-review process efficiently. However, review duration may vary depending on:

  • Availability of reviewers

  • Quality of the submission

  • Required revisions

  • Subject complexity

Authors are informed about the status of their manuscripts throughout the review process.

Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not:

  • Share manuscript content with third parties

  • Use unpublished data for personal research

  • Disclose author information

Confidentiality is maintained throughout the review and publication process.

Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest related to:

  • Authors

  • Institutions

  • Funding organizations

  • Research collaborations

Individuals with conflicts of interest will not participate in the review process.

Ethical Standards

GIJ follows internationally recognized publication ethics standards and expects reviewers, editors, and authors to uphold integrity, professionalism, and ethical conduct throughout the publication process.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective and constructive feedback

  • Complete reviews within the assigned timeframe

  • Identify relevant published work not cited

  • Report ethical concerns or suspected misconduct

  • Maintain confidentiality

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may contact the Editorial Office regarding appeals or complaints related to editorial decisions. Appeals must include clear academic justification and supporting information.

The Editorial Board will review all appeals fairly and independently.