Journal of Writing Research earli | contact
journal description
aims and scope
open access
editorial board
current issue
back issues
early view
special issue
most downloaded
peer review policy
related websites

Peer review policy

The practice of peer review is applied to ensure that excellent research is published. It is an objective process at the heart of high-quality scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the Journal of Writing Research and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.

Special issues may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, guest editors or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects will receive full details of the peer review process on request.

Initial manuscript evaluation

The Editors first evaluate all manuscripts. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least two experts for review.

Type of Peer Review

This journal employs a double blind review process, where the referee remains anonymous throughout the process.

How the referee is selected

Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author though these recommendations may or may not be used.

Referee reports

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original, and of international, not local, significance.
  • Is methodologically sound and uses appropriate techniques.
  • Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions.
  • Has correct references to previous relevant work.

Language editors

A group of language editors ensures the linguistic and stylistic quality of the manuscript. In the review stage they formulate recommendations to the authors on how to improve the language of their text (minor shortcomings) or formulate advice to contact a native speaker (major shortcomings).

How long does the review process take?

Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within six weeks. If the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unreasonably delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. Referees 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 referees.

Editor's decision

Referees advise the editors, who are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

For readers
free subscription
alert service
full text
For authors
guide for authors
submit article
For reviewers
guide for reviewers
submit review
Repository login
home contact