Selecting peer-reviewers

The journal “Political Science and Security Studies Journal” applies a double-blind peer review process to ensure the scientific quality, objectivity, impartiality, and academic integrity of manuscript evaluation.

Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope.

Selection of Reviewers

External peer reviewers are selected from independent scholars and experts who:

  • have publications relevant to the subject of the manuscript;
  • possess appropriate academic expertise in the field of the submitted article;
  • have experience in research, peer review, or editorial evaluation;
  • maintain verified academic profiles, such as ORCID, Scopus, Web of Science, Publons / Web of Science Reviewer Recognition, or Google Scholar;
  • have no conflict of interest with the authors, institutions, funders, or subject matter of the manuscript.

Priority in Reviewer Selection

Priority in reviewer selection may be given to:

  1. researchers with active Publons / Web of Science Reviewer Recognition profiles;
  2. reviewers who have previously collaborated with the journal and demonstrated high-quality review practices;
  3. scholars with recent publications in the relevant subject area;
  4. experts recommended by members of the Editorial Board;
  5. scholars who have expressed interest in reviewing through the journal’s reviewer registration tools.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to appoint additional reviewers where necessary, including in cases of interdisciplinary manuscripts, conflicting reviews, or highly specialized research topics.

Reviewer Independence

Reviewers must be independent of the authors and should not have recent collaborative, institutional, financial, personal, or competitive relationships that may influence their assessment.

A reviewer must decline the invitation to review if any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest exists.

Peer Review Procedure

  1. each manuscript undergoes initial editorial screening, also referred to as desk review;
  2. manuscripts that meet the journal’s requirements are sent to at least two independent reviewers;
  3. reviewers receive an anonymized manuscript, a standard review form, and reviewer guidelines;
  4. the standard review period is usually 3–4 weeks;
  5. in case of conflicting reviews, a third reviewer may be appointed.

Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewers’ reports, the Editorial Board may decide to:

  • accept the manuscript without revision;
  • accept the manuscript after minor revision;
  • request major revision and resubmission;
  • reject the manuscript.

The final editorial decision is made by the Editorial Board, with the participation of the Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief.

Ethical Principles for Reviewers

All reviewers are required to:

  • adhere to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE);
  • maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and review process;
  • provide objective, evidence-based, and unbiased evaluations;
  • avoid personal criticism of authors;
  • refrain from using unpublished materials for personal advantage;
  • declare any conflicts of interest and decline the review if such conflicts exist.

Confidentiality

  • the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed under the double-blind peer review model;
  • manuscripts must not be shared, discussed, copied, or distributed to third parties without editorial permission;
  • reviewers must not use information obtained during peer review for personal, professional, or competitive advantage.

Transparency and Integrity

The Editorial Board ensures that:

  • editorial decisions are independent of financial, institutional, political, or personal influence;
  • the peer review process remains impartial and confidential;
  • academic integrity standards are strictly upheld;
  • reviewer selection is based on academic competence and relevance to the manuscript topic.

Misconduct Handling

In cases of plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, reviewer misconduct, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other ethical violations, the journal follows COPE guidelines and best practices.

Note: The selection of peer reviewers is conducted to ensure competent, independent, objective, and confidential assessment of manuscripts submitted to Political Science and Security Studies Journal.