Peer Review Process

The Journal of Comparative Study of Religions (JCSR) applies a double-blind peer-review process to evaluate the scholarly quality, originality, relevance, and academic contribution of submitted manuscripts. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process, in accordance with the journal's editorial workflow.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the editor or editor-in-chief conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript falls within JCSR's aims and scope and meets the journal's basic submission requirements.

The initial screening may include an assessment of the manuscript's relevance, originality, completeness, adherence to the Author Guidelines, and suitability for external peer review. JCSR also screens manuscripts for potential plagiarism using Turnitin.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's scope or basic requirements may be returned to the authors for improvement or declined before external peer review. Manuscripts that pass the initial screening proceed to the peer-review stage.

2. External Peer Review

Each manuscript that proceeds to peer review is evaluated by at least two reviewers with relevant scholarly expertise. JCSR uses a double-blind review arrangement in which authors and reviewers are not informed of each other's identities through the journal's review process.

Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, engagement with relevant literature, clarity of argument, appropriateness of its methods or analytical approach, quality of evidence, and contribution to the field of comparative religious studies.

Reviewers provide critical comments and recommendations to assist the editorial decision-making process and, where appropriate, to help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based assessments and to treat manuscripts and review materials confidentially.

A reviewer who considers themselves unqualified to assess a manuscript, unable to complete the review appropriately, or affected by a potential conflict of interest should inform the editor.

3. Editorial Evaluation and Decision

After the peer-review reports have been received, the editor evaluates the reviewers' comments and the manuscript's overall scholarly merit. The editor may consider the need for revision, the relevance of the reviewers' recommendations, and the journal's editorial policies.

The publication decision is determined through the JCSR Editorial Board's deliberation, based on the reviewers' reports and the editor's assessment. Possible outcomes include acceptance, a request for revision, or rejection. Where further revision or assessment is required, the manuscript may be reconsidered before a final decision is reached.

The editorial decision is based on scholarly merit, originality, relevance to the journal's aims and scope, and compliance with the journal's publication policies. The journal does not guarantee acceptance merely because a manuscript has undergone peer review.

4. Revision and Further Assessment

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the comments and recommendations provided by the reviewers and editor. Authors should submit a revised manuscript and, where requested, a response explaining how the comments have been addressed or providing reasons for any points that have not been adopted.

The editor assesses the revised manuscript to determine whether the requested changes have been adequately addressed. Depending on the nature and extent of the revisions, the editor may seek further assessment from the original reviewers or other appropriate reviewers.

The submission of a revised manuscript does not automatically guarantee acceptance. The manuscript remains subject to editorial evaluation and the applicable publication decision process.

5. Confidentiality, Objectivity, and Conflicts of Interest

JCSR treats submitted manuscripts and peer-review reports as confidential materials. Information obtained during peer review must not be used for purposes unrelated to the review or disclosed to unauthorised parties.

Reviewers are expected to assess manuscripts objectively and to support their comments with clear scholarly reasoning. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Editorial assessments should be based on the manuscript's academic quality and relevance, rather than the author's personal characteristics or institutional affiliation.

Reviewers should disclose potential conflicts of interest to the editor and decline a review assignment when a conflict could compromise their impartiality. Editors who identify a relevant conflict should take appropriate steps to avoid compromising the fairness of the editorial assessment.

6. Concerns and Objections

Authors who have questions or concerns about reviewer comments or an editorial decision may communicate them to the editor or editorial office. Any response should identify the manuscript concerned and explain the issue clearly and professionally.

The editor will consider the concern in light of the relevant review reports, editorial assessment, and journal policies. Where appropriate, the editor may seek clarification or consult relevant members of the Editorial Board before determining the appropriate response.

The handling of concerns is intended to support fair and consistent editorial assessment. This provision does not guarantee a change in the original decision, and any further consideration remains subject to the journal's editorial judgment.

7. Review Timeline

JCSR does not prescribe a fixed review timeline. The time required for editorial screening, reviewer invitations, peer review, revision, and editorial deliberation may vary according to the manuscript's subject matter, reviewer availability, and the nature of any required revisions.

Authors are encouraged to respond to editorial communications and revision requests in a timely manner.

8. Final Publication Decision

The final decision on whether a manuscript is published is made through the JCSR Editorial Board's decision-making process, taking into account the reviewers' recommendations, the editor's assessment, and the journal's editorial policies. Only manuscripts that satisfy the journal's scholarly and publication requirements will be considered for publication.

JCSR is committed to conducting peer review in a manner that supports academic integrity, confidentiality, fairness, and the quality of the published scholarly record.