Once your manuscript is assessed for suitability by the editors, it undergoes single-blind peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees. Reviewers evaluate the scientific quality, originality, and relevance of the submission. Based on their recommendations, which will be forwarded to the author(s), the editor will decide whether to accept the paper, request revisions, or reject it.
Like all scientific journals, NJG is facing increasing difficulties in finding reviewers and obtaining reviews within a reasonable timeframe. This reflects what has become known as the peer review crisis (e.g. Horta & Jung, 2024), which is widely discussed in the scholarly publishing community and is attributed to a growing volume of manuscript submissions and reviewer fatigue. The editorial team is doing its best to process manuscripts in a timely manner. However, as we cannot compel reviewers to undertake this voluntary work, we ask for your understanding if the review process takes longer than expected.
Horta, H. & Jung, J., 2024. The crisis of peer review: Part of the evolution of science. Higher Education Quarterly 78: e12511. DOI:10.1111/hequ.12511
Proofs of articles accepted for publication will be sent to the corresponding author for checking. Authors are not expected to make changes that depart from the version accepted by the Editors. Substantial changes may be charged to the author at cost.
