All submitted manuscript are screened by the editorial team before peer review. During this stage, instructions for author and ethical issues are checked. If the manuscript is considered suitable for review process, it will be sent to at least two reviewers. They will review the manuscripts' originality, significance, and so on, including their methodology and empirical accuracy. Acceptance of the manuscript is decided based on the critiques and recommended decision of the reviewers. The editors evaluate the peer reviewers’ recommendations, and then notifies the authors of their final manuscript’s status. The manuscript may be:
- Accepted for publication as it is,
- Accepted for publication with minor changes,
- Accepted for publication after major revision and additional review,
All manuscripts submitted for publication in JPP are initially evaluated by an Associate Editor from the journal’s editorial team, to determine if it fits the scope and objectives of the journal, as well as to identify possible plagiarism practices. In this stage, the Editors will check also whether the methodology and/or data analysis are obviously defective, and whether the language and presentation are of a standard that permits peer review.
A submission may be returned for resubmission or rejected without peer review if the topic falls outside the aims and scope of the journal, if the work lacks originality, or if there are significant problems with presentation, research or argumentation. Manuscripts considered appropriate will be sent to external reviewers for peer review.
A manuscript that passes the preliminary evaluation is sent to at least two external reviewers from the same field as the author(s).
JPP strictly follows a double-blind peer review process, in which the authors do not know the reviewers and vice versa. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on set criteria and to provide comments and recommendations to the Editor on whether a manuscript can be accepted, requires revisions or should be rejected.
Based on the recommendations by the reviewers, the Editorial team will make the final decision on acceptance, rejection, and revision of the manuscript. In the case of re-submission of the manuscript after its revision, a final decision will be taken on the basis of the changes made by the authors in response to the suggestions and criticisms of the reviewers.
When the manuscript is approved with some modifications, the corresponding author will be informed about the corrections that must be made to improve the quality and will have a deadline to make the adjustments and send the corrected version to the Editor accompanied by a letter detailing the adjustments made.
The revised manuscripts will be sent to the same reviewers who assessed them previously for a second review. In that case, reviewers may provide further comments and in so doing request another revision. In general, the journal allows no more than two rounds of major revisions.
Notification of the final decision
In the letter to the author in which the journal's final acceptance of paper is communicated, it will also be indicated in which number the article will be published, and when the author will receive proofs for correction.
The final decision of rejection of a manuscript is final.
The journal does not return rejected manuscripts.