Peer Review Process

The Yearbook of UNWE employs a strict double-blind peer review process to ensure scientific rigour and impartiality, while maintaining the confidentiality of both authors and reviewers.

The Editorial Board requires all reviewers to read and adhere to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

The review procedure includes the following stages:

1. Initial Screening (Desk Review)

The Editor-in-Chief (the invited/guest editor) reviews each manuscript for the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the journal’s Aims and Scope.
  • Adherence to formatting and ethical guidelines.
  • Plagiarism Check: Manuscripts are screened with specialised software.
  • Anonymisation.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria are rejected at this stage and are not sent to reviewers.

In cases where the Editor-in-Chief (the invited/guest editor) has a conflict of interest (e.g., as an author/co-author of the manuscript, or through personal/professional ties to the author), the initial screening is conducted by an Editorial Board member without a conflict.

2. Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the Desk Review are sent for peer review to two independent experts in the relevant field.

  • Reviewers are selected based on their subject-matter expertise.
  • Reviews are submitted using a standard form, typically within 3 to 4 weeks. Extensions may be granted with prior notification to the Editorial Board.
  • Reviewers use a standardized evaluation form.

Possible outcomes:

  • Acceptance without changes.
  • Acceptance with minor revisions.
  • Major revision and resubmission for review.
  • Rejection without further consideration.

If the two reviewers' assessments differ significantly, a third reviewer is invited.

3. Editorial Decision

The Editorial Board makes the final decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection based on the reviewers’ reports and the paper's scientific contribution.

  • For revisions, authors must address reviewers’ comments in a brief report submitted with the revised manuscript.
  • If a submission is rejected, authors will be notified of the decision. Reviewers’ comments are shared only when available.
  • The resubmission does not guarantee acceptance.