Peer Review Policy

An article submitted to JOLCEL is first screened by the editor and can be rejected at this stage if it fails to meet the minimum criteria. Articles submitted to JOLCEL must:

• not be under review elsewhere,
• fall within the scope and theme of the journal,
• present original research that has not previously been published and that contributes to the present state of knowledge,
• use a clear and correct language.

The editorial board appoints two external referees for a double-blind peer review of the article. Editors and reviewers should disclose any conflicts of interest resulting from direct competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors. Submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents by the editors and the reviewers. In case of conflicting reviews, editors can seek additional reviews, of which decision the author will be informed. Decisions about publication are made by the editor on the basis of the reviewers’ reports.

The editor’s decision is communicated to the author together with the recommendations of the referees. In case of a request for major changes, the revised manuscript is returned to the referees, who may request another revision. The editor is responsible for the final decision on the article and informs the author of this decision as soon as it is made.

Response articles go through a different editorial process. Authors of response articles are invited by the editorial board, and their articles are reviewed by the editors.

A notification of acceptance or a request for revision may be expected within 6 months of submission of the article. The article will be scheduled in the issue that is up for publication, except when this issue is a thematic one.