Evaluation Process

Initial Manuscript Evaluation

The editor first evaluates all manuscripts. Manuscripts which are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal will be rejected at this stage. The editor will usually inform authors of manuscript’s rejection within two weeks of receipt. Manuscripts meeting the minimum criteria are then passed on to at least two experts for review.

Type of Peer Review

This journal employs double-blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected for the manuscript according to their expertise, reputation, experience, and qualifications (having at least a PhD degree in a relevant field). JRP gets reviewers' consent before sending them manuscripts for review. Our database is constantly being updated. Author(s) may reject any potential reviewers on the grounds of conflict of interest.

Criteria for Referee Reports

Referees will evaluate the manuscripts on the following criteria looking at whether the manuscript:

  • Is original
  • Is methodologically sound
  • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
  • Has results which are presented clearly and support the conclusions
  • Correctly references previous relevant work

Referees are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer-review process.

Review Process

Typically, it will take three months for the manuscript to be reviewed. If the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees within one week. Referees may request more than one revision of a manuscript. If the comments/evaluation of both experts is satisfactory, the paper is submitted to the Editorial Board for possible acceptance. Otherwise, it is returned to the author(s) for modification as suggested by the expert(s).

The revised paper submitted by the author(s) is again sent to the same experts for final comments if required. Upon the unavailability of the initial reviewer, that manuscript will be sent to another reviewer for comments. The final comments of the experts/reviewers are submitted to the Editorial Board for final decision.

Final Report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees and may include comments by the referees. Furthermore, upon acceptance, authors will be required to submit the manuscript as per JRP author guidelines.

Editor's Decision is Final

Section editors would recommend a decision on a submitted manuscript based on reviewer reports to the editor. The editor is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. The editorial board is under no obligation to justify its decision.

Common Reasons for Manuscript Rejection

Manuscripts can be rejected for many reasons, but these can generally be divided into technical and editorial reasons. Technical reasons usually require more work, such as further experiments or analyses before your work can be published.

Technical reasons for rejection include:

  • The manuscript provides incomplete data such as too small a sample size or missing or inadequate controls.
  • The author presents poor analysis, such as using inappropriate statistical tests
  • An inappropriate methodology is used for testing the hypotheses.
  • Unclear rationale for research or hypothesis.
  • The author presents inaccurate conclusions that are not supported by the data or the author has fabricated the data.
  • Submission guidelines of JRP have not been followed.

Editorial Reasons for Rejection include

  • The manuscript is not within the scope of the journal.
  • The standards of research ethics (e.g. indication of potential risk/harm to the participants; informed consent from the participants was not obtained; ethics approval was not acquired) and integrity (instrument validity check, standard pay rate for all participants if they have been paid for the participation, completion time, falsification of IP addresses, attention checks, consistency, manipulation, response patterns, seriousness, and atypicality checks) have not been met.
  • Violation of publication ethics (for example contacting the reviewers and letting them know about the author’s identity).
  • Lack of originality and novelty. Irrelevant subject matter. The manuscript has not made a significant contribution to the existing body of knowledge.
  • Lack of structure and critical reviews.
  • Journal formatting requirements not followed. Grammatical and typographical errors. Inadequate corrections of the final copy of proofs. Referencing mistakes within the text and the list of references.
  • Lack of the necessary details for the readers to fully understand the content.
  • Verbosity and redundancy.
  • Lack of up-to-date references or references containing a high proportion of self-citations.
  • Poor language quality.
  • Illogical and poorly presented data and results.
  • Improper emailing/uploading of the manuscript. Careless mistakes such as a missing cover letter, or faulty author affiliations.
  • Factors such as units and abbreviations, spellings, company brand names, tables, figures, and illustrations are inappropriately presented.
  • Submission deadlines are not met and copyright forms are not submitted at the appropriate time.
  • Syntax errors, etc.
  • Failure to meet the above-mentioned criteria can also delay the publication of your manuscript adding to unnecessary afflictions. These rejection reasons can be avoided by following principles of research ethics and integrity, journal-specific guidelines, writing a coherent paper in good English, and honestly assessing your work when deciding on a target journal.

Originality of Manuscript

JRP accepts original manuscripts with the understanding that:

  • They have not been published already in whole or part, nor are they under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. All manuscripts must report original research and will be subjected to peer review at the discretion of the Editors.
  • Please note that JPR requires a similarity index from the authors at the time of article submission and also uses Turnitin software to screen manuscripts for unoriginal material. By submitting your article to JPR you are agreeing to any originality checks your manuscript may undergo during the peer review and production processes.
  • Those who contributed in various capacities are either included as authors or have been duly acknowledged
  • Author(s) will be solely responsible for any plagiarism.
  • It is highly recommended that author(s) follow the publication ethics and malpractice policies laid down by the American Psychological Association (APA) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
  • In case of any breach of policy, or rules being found, the editorial team reserves the right to take legal action/ penalty as decided accordingly