Peer Review Process

Peer Review Policy and Process

Elevate  implements a rigorous double-blind peer review policy to ensure the academic quality, objectivity, and credibility of all published works. The following outlines the peer review process used by the journal in numbered narrative form:

  1. Initial Editorial Screening
    All manuscripts submitted to journal undergo an initial editorial screening by the Editor-in-Chief and/or Managing Editor. At this stage, the editorial team assesses whether the manuscript fits the journal's thematic scope, complies with formatting and submission guidelines, and demonstrates basic academic merit. Manuscripts that fail to meet these minimum criteria, or show signs of ethical violations, are desk-rejected without proceeding to peer review.

  2. Reviewer Assignment
    Submissions that pass the initial screening are then assigned to at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on their subject matter expertise, academic credentials, and prior experience in scholarly publishing. All reviewer identities are kept confidential, and authors remain anonymous to reviewers throughout the process to ensure the integrity of the double-blind system.

  3. Manuscript Evaluation
    Reviewers are given approximately 3–6 weeks to assess the manuscript using the journal’s structured review form. They are asked to evaluate the originality, theoretical contribution, methodological soundness, clarity of argument, relevance to the field, and adherence to ethical standards. Reviewers may recommend the manuscript be accepted as is, accepted with minor revisions, returned for major revisions, or rejected outright. Their feedback must be constructive, detailed, and aimed at improving the manuscript’s quality.

  4. Editorial Decision
    Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief—sometimes in consultation with the editorial board—makes a final decision. In cases of conflicting reviews, a third reviewer may be invited. Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments and are expected to revise the manuscript accordingly. Revised submissions may undergo a second round of peer review if deemed necessary by the editorial team.

  5. Communication and Follow-Up
    Authors are informed of the editorial decision within an estimated timeframe of 8 to 12 weeks from submission. This timeframe may vary depending on reviewer availability and the number of revision rounds required. The Managing Editor oversees communication with authors and reviewers, ensuring that all correspondence remains professional, timely, and confidential.

  6. Ethical and Quality Assurance
    The peer review process at journal adheres strictly to the ethical guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Reviewers and editors must declare any conflict of interest prior to manuscript assignment. All review materials are treated as confidential, and any misuse of manuscript content is strictly prohibited. Reviewers who repeatedly violate review ethics may be removed from the database.

Publion is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, and efficient peer review process that supports academic rigor and intellectual contribution, particularly from underrepresented regions and perspectives in international relations.