|
 | | | |
|
|
|
JOURNAL OF ENGLISH FOR ACADEMIC PURPOSES
| |
| | |
|
|
See also Elsevier Linguistics programme home
Peer Review Policy for the Journal of English for Academic Purposes
The Journal of English for Academic Purposes practices a double blind peer review policy. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that only good research is published. Peer review is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable academic journals. Our reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the Journal of English for Academic Purposes and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Initial manuscript evaluation
An Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are outside the aims and scope of the journal, or are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, or display poor command of the English language. Manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review.
Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will usually be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.
Type of peer review
The Journal of English for Academic Purposes employs double blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process.
How the reviewer is selected
The members of the Editorial Board play an important part in the review process, but we also use outside reviewers, and our reviewer database is constantly being updated. Whenever possible, reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise. We welcome suggestions for reviewers from the author though these recommendations are not necessarily used.
Reviewers' reports
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:
- Is original
- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
- Is methodologically sound
- Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
- Correctly references previous relevant work
Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but reviewers may, if they so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.
How long does the review process take?
Reviewers, including Editorial Board members, are volunteers, and we depend on their generosity. The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the reviewers. However, the typical time for JEAP is approximately 6-12 weeks. Should the reviewers' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second reviewer for the manuscript, or when the one reviewer's report has thoroughly convinced the Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one reviewer's report. The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the reviewers, which usually includes verbatim comments by the reviewers. Revised manuscripts, on resubmission, might be returned for re-review to the initial reviewer(s) or to new reviewers. Only exceptionally will a further opportunity to revise be offered to an author.
Final report
A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers, and may include verbatim comments by the reviewers.
The Editor's decision is final
Reviewers advise the Editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Becoming a reviewer for the Journal of English for Academic Purposes
If you are not currently a reviewer for JEAP but would like to be considered as a reviewer, please contact the editorial office at: jeap@elsevier.com. The benefits of reviewing for the Journal of English for Academic Purposes include the opportunity to read, see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You will also be acknowledged in an annual statement in JEAP if you have reviewed in the preceding 12 months. Reviewers who provide their reports using the Elsevier Editorial System (EES) also receive a month's free access to SCOPUS (www.scopus.com), the world's largest abstracting and indexing database as well as to ScienceDirect (www.sciencedirect.com), for every review provided. You may also be able to cite your work for the Journal of English for Academic Purposes as part of your professional development requirements for various professional societies and organisations.
Special issues
Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organisers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office; email: jeap@elsevier.com.
|
|
| |
| | |
|
|
| |
|
|
