Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

Global Review of Humanities & Social Thought (GRHST) follows a rigorous, transparent, and ethical double-blind peer-review process to ensure that all published research meets the highest academic standards. Manuscripts are evaluated fairly, independently, and without bias.

1. Double-Blind Review System

Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the peer-review process.
Authors must ensure that their manuscripts do not contain any identifying information.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Each submission undergoes a preliminary assessment by the editorial team to evaluate:

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

  • Originality and contribution to humanities and social sciences

  • Formatting and adherence to submission guidelines

  • Plagiarism and ethical compliance

Manuscripts may be desk-rejected if they fall outside the journal’s scope or fail to meet basic academic criteria.

3. Assignment to Reviewers

Submissions that pass the editorial screening are sent to at least two qualified reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

  • Quality and depth of research

  • Originality and scholarly contribution

  • Methodological soundness (where applicable)

  • Clarity, coherence, and academic presentation

4. Review Timeline

  • Editorial screening: 1–2 weeks

  • Peer review: 6–10 weeks

  • Final decision: approximately 12 weeks

Timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.

5. Possible Editorial Decisions

Following the peer-review process, the editorial board may issue one of the following decisions:

  • Accept

  • Minor revisions required

  • Major revisions required

  • Reject

6. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and academically grounded feedback

  • Maintain strict confidentiality of submitted manuscripts

  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest

  • Submit evaluations within the agreed timeline

7. Ethical Standards

GRHST adheres to international publication ethics, including the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
All submissions undergo plagiarism screening using standard tools.
Unethical manuscripts may be rejected and, where necessary, reported to the author’s institution.

8. Appeals

Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may submit a reasoned written request to:

Email: editor@lrdouk.com

For All Queries

Email: info@lrdouk.com