Peer Review Policy

JHTS uses double-blind peer review: reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. [TO CONFIRM]

The process

1. Screening. The editors check that the manuscript fits the journal’s scope, follows the author guidelines and is properly anonymised.
2. Plagiarism check. The manuscript is checked with similarity-detection software (see the Plagiarism and Similarity Checking policy).
3. Peer review. The editors invite at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the subject [TO CONFIRM]. Reviewers are asked to respond within a set period [TO CONFIRM].
4. Decision. On the basis of the reviews, the editors accept, ask for minor or major revisions, or reject the manuscript, and send the anonymised reviewer comments to the author.
5. Revisions. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers.

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision. Book reviews and editorials are reviewed by the editors rather than external reviewers.

Appeals

Authors may appeal a decision by writing to the Editor-in-Chief with a clear explanation of their grounds. Appeals are considered by an editor not involved in the original decision [TO CONFIRM].