Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

All research manuscripts submitted to COMMUSTY: Journal of Communication Studies and Society are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process: the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors. The process follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Review model Double-blind
Reviewers per manuscript At least two
Similarity check Turnitin, maximum 20%
Time to first decision Approximately 14 days after submission

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Each new submission is first checked by the editorial team for fit with the Focus and Scope, compliance with the Author Guidelines and the journal template, the quality of English, and originality. Similarity is checked with Turnitin; manuscripts with a similarity index above 20% are returned to the authors (see the Plagiarism Policy). Manuscripts that do not meet these basic requirements may be declined or returned for correction before peer review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. To ensure anonymity, authors must remove their names, affiliations, acknowledgements, and any identifying information (including file metadata) from the manuscript file submitted for review. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript on the following criteria:

  • Originality and contribution to communication and cultural studies
  • Relevance to the journal's scope
  • Clarity of the research problem and objectives
  • Appropriateness and rigor of the methods
  • Quality of the analysis, discussion, and conclusions
  • Use of relevant and up-to-date references
  • Clarity of writing and organization

Reviewers are asked to complete their review within 10 days. Reviews must be objective, supported by clear arguments, and free of personal criticism of the authors.

3. Editorial Decision

The handling editor makes a decision based on the reviewers' reports. If the reviewers' recommendations differ significantly, the editor may invite an additional reviewer. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief. One of the following decisions is communicated to the authors:

  • Accept: the manuscript is accepted without further changes.
  • Minor Revision: the manuscript requires small changes; revisions are expected within 7 days.
  • Major Revision: the manuscript requires substantial changes; revisions are expected within 14 days and may be sent back to the reviewers.
  • Decline: the manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.

4. Revision and Final Decision

Authors submit the revised manuscript together with a response letter explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed. The editor checks the revision, consults the reviewers if necessary, and makes the final decision. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading by the authors, layout, and publication with a Crossref DOI.

5. Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

Manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must declare any conflict of interest and withdraw from handling a manuscript where such a conflict exists. Manuscripts submitted by members of the editorial team are handled by another editor and undergo the same double-blind review process, without the author's involvement in any editorial decision.

6. Appeals

Authors who believe a decision was made in error may submit an appeal as described in the Post-Publication Discussion, Complaints and Appeals policy.