Peer Review Process

Gender and Child Law Review conducts a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure that each published manuscript meets high academic standards. This process is designed to assess the quality, validity, and originality of the submitted scientific work. The following are the steps in our journal's peer review process:

1. Manuscript Submission
After the author submits the manuscript through the online manuscript submission system, the editor will conduct an initial check to ensure that the manuscript meets basic requirements such as the suitability of the topic to the focus and scope of the journal, the writing format, and the originality of the work.
2. Initial Evaluation by the Editor
The editor will conduct an initial evaluation of the manuscript to determine whether the manuscript is suitable to be forwarded to the review stage or not. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic criteria or are outside the focus of the journal may be rejected at this stage.
3. Double-Blind Peer Review Process
a. Gender and Child Law Review uses a double-blind peer review process, which means that the identities of authors and reviewers are kept secret from each other. This is done to ensure objectivity and avoid bias in judgment.
b. Each manuscript that passes the initial evaluation will be sent to a minimum of two independent reviewers who have expertise in fields relevant to the topic of the manuscript.
4. Reviewer Assessment Criteria
Reviewers will score the manuscript based on several criteria, including:
a. Originality and Scientific Contribution: Does the manuscript offer a new and significant contribution to the field of study covered?
b. Methodology: Are the research methods used valid, clear, and appropriately applied?
c. Quality of Analysis: Is the analysis in-depth and supported by strong data?
d. Clarity of Presentation: Is the manuscript well written, clear, and logical, and in accordance with academic writing standards?
e. Relevance of References: Do the authors cite relevant and current literature to support their arguments?
5. Reviewer's Decision
Based on the assessment, the reviewer will make a recommendation to the editor, which can be:
a. Accepted without revision: The manuscript can be accepted for publication without changes.
b. Accepted with minor revisions: The manuscript requires minor changes before publication.
c. Accepted with major revisions: Manuscript requires significant changes and needs to be revisited after revision.
d. Rejected: The manuscript does not meet the standards for publication in this journal.
6. Editor's Final Decision
The editor will review the recommendations of the reviewers and make a final decision on the acceptance of the manuscript. This decision may include:
a. Accepting the manuscript as is.
b. Requesting the author to make revisions (both minor and major).
c. Rejecting the manuscript.
7. Revision by the Author
If revisions are requested, authors must make changes according to the feedback from reviewers and editors. The revised manuscript must be resubmitted through the online system within the specified time period.
8. Re-review (If Required)
The revised manuscript may be sent back to the reviewers for re-assessment, especially if the requested revisions are major revisions.
9. Proofreading and Finalization
Once the manuscript is finalized, it will go through a proofreading stage to ensure there are no typographical or formatting errors before publication.
10. Publication
Manuscripts that have passed all stages of review and revision will be published in the next edition of Gender and Child Law Review.