Peer Review Policy
The peer review process is to ensure that only good articles are published. Our reviewers are given the important task to maintain good quality of the articles published in Issues in Language Studies (ILS) and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Preliminary Evaluation
The Editors first evaluate all manuscripts. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.
Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our reviewer database contains reviewer contact details together with their subject areas of interest, and this is constantly being updated.
Reviewer reports
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:
- Is original
- Is methodologically sound
- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
- Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
- Correctly references previous relevant work
However, reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. Reviewers are requested to refrain from indicating their identity in one way or another in the review report. Any explicit personal opinion should be director to the editor and not the authors.
Duration of Peer Review Process
Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 3-8 weeks. Should the reviewers’ reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the Editors within 3 to 4 weeks and the Editors may request further advice from the reviewers at this time. The Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript.
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.
Editor’s Decision is final
Reviewers advise the Editors, who are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Becoming a Reviewer
If you are not currently a reviewer for the ILS but would like to be considered as a reviewer for this Journal, please contact the Chief Editor at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., and provide your contact details.
