Evaluation Process

Submitted articles are first reviewed by the journal's technical team from the perspective of strict compliance with the required formal requirements (see Author Guidelines). If there are any inadequacies in the established standards, the work will be rejected and returned to the authors with instructions for modification.

Before assigning reviewers to the manuscripts, the editors of each section of the journal conduct a preliminary analysis to determine if the submitted manuscript is a) appropriate for the scope of the journal and/or b) innovative and of strong scientific and social relevance. We consider this initial screening important as it makes the best use of both the authors' and potential reviewers' time.

If approved in this initial screening, the article proceeds to peer review in a double-blind review system. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two external ad hoc reviewers who are experts in the subject matter of the manuscript. The reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities, and the authors do not know who provided the evaluation. The reviewers' comments will be added to the assessment of the responsible section editor, who may decide to reject the article or consider it for publication after revision. In either case, the reviewers' and editor's comments will be shared with the authors.

Once the article receives promising evaluations from the reviewers and section editor, the authors will have up to 3 weeks to make the necessary revisions, depending on the level of complexity required during the review. The revised article should be resubmitted to the journal with the changes highlighted in red, accompanied by a response letter indicating the changes made or relevant arguments in case of disagreements.

Upon receiving the revised article, the section editor will suggest: 1) rejection, considering that the requests were not adequately addressed; 2) further revision, possibly contacting the reviewers who conducted the evaluation for a second check; or 3) acceptance for publication. Such editorial recommendation will be subject to the approval of the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal, who will conduct the final analysis of the manuscript and make the final decision. All articles published in the journal indicate the identity of the section editor responsible for the evaluation process.

Authors can track the evaluation status of their article through the OJS platform and will also be notified in a timely manner about the receipt, acceptance, or rejection of the work via email. Authors can contact the journal at any time to inquire about the evaluation stage. Additionally, the journal will consider any appeal or dispute regarding the editorial decision, provided it is presented in a well-argued manner and supported by new evidence related to the considerations made during the evaluation. The publication order does not present any bias, and the approved manuscripts are sent for publication in the ongoing volume, in the line with the continuous flow publishing model.

The evaluation process in The Journal Of Psychology: Theory and Practice takes on average six months but can take up to a year in some cases. However, we are continuously implementing new measures to ensure that the evaluation period does not exceed a maximum of six months.