PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Submissions should be prepared in accordance with the Author's Guidelines. The manuscript may be returned to authors without a scientific assessment if they do not meet all submission requirements, if they are not in the correct format, or cannot be downloaded reliably.
Submissions must represent the original and independent work of the authors. Each new submission is assessed by the Editor in Chief/Regional Handling Editor using Manuscript Readiness Level (MRL) to determine whether it falls within the general remit of the Journal of Lex Philosophy (JLP). We will reject a manuscript without review if it contains insufficient content; it exceeds our word limit or is incorrectly formatted; is poorly presented and unclear. Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment will be handled by the Editor in Chief/Regional Handling Editor to oversee the review process for contribution, originality, relevance, and presentation.
Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer review. A single-blind review is applied, where authors' identities are known to reviewers. Peer review comments are confidential and will only be disclosed with the express agreement of the reviewer. All manuscripts are subject to peer review and authors can expect a decision, or an explanation for the delay, within 2 months of receipt. If a revision is invited, the corresponding author should submit the revised manuscript within 2 weeks. The final decision is taken by the Editor in Chief based on the information gained through the peer-review process.
We ensure that the reviewed manuscript is treated confidentially prior to being published, as explained in publication ethics.
Types of decision
Following peer review, the paper is judged not to be acceptable for publication in Journal of Lex Philosophy (JLP) and resubmission is not possible.
Resubmit for Review
The submitted version of the paper is not acceptable and requires major revision, but there is clear potential in the work, and the JJournal of Lex Philosophy (JLP) is prepared to consider a new version. Authors are offered the opportunity to resubmit their paper as a new submission. Concerns will remain regarding the suitability of the paper for publication until the editors are convinced by the authors that their paper fits the scope and standards of the Journal of Lex Philosophy (JLP). The resubmitted manuscript will be returned to the original associate editor if at all possible.
The paper requires changes before a final decision can be made. Authors are asked to modify their manuscript in light of comments received from referees and editors and to submit a new version for consideration within 2 weeks of receiving the decision letter. A point-by-point explanation of how comments have been addressed must be supplied with the revised version of the paper. Revisions may undergo further peer review and papers may undergo more than one round of revision. If the authors do not revise their papers to the satisfaction of the editors, the paper can still be declined from publication in theJournal of Lex Philosophy (JLP)
The paper is accepted for publication, subject to conditions that need to be addressed in producing a final version of the manuscript. These may include sub-editing changes and minor amendments to ensure the paper fully matches our criteria. After final checking in the editorial office, acceptance is confirmed and the paper is forwarded to the publishers for publication.
Editorial and publishing process
Journal of Lex Philosophy (JLP) follow the editorial and publishing process set by PKP, as presented in the following figure.