Peer Review & Policy Process

Peer Review Policy and Procedure

The Psychiatry Nursing Journal (PNJ) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and promoting responsible research practices. Reviewers adhere to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, which are designed to maintain the integrity of academic work through ethical behavior and trust. These guidelines outline essential principles for reviewers, offering direction for researchers, support for journals and editors, and educational value for institutions.

Type of Peer Review

PNJ employs a double-blind peer review system, where the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. To preserve this confidentiality, authors are advised to submit a title page—listing all authors—as a separate file. Templates and further instructions can be found in the author guidelines.

Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are chosen based on their specific areas of expertise. PNJ regularly updates its reviewer database to ensure relevance and quality. While authors may suggest potential reviewers, the journal is not obligated to use them. Each manuscript is reviewed independently by at least two unbiased reviewers. The final decision rests with the editor.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript based on the criteria: originality and innovation in ideas and methodology (including data), soundness and appropriateness of the methods used, clarity and support of results and conclusions, proper and thorough citation of relevant literature, adherence to ethical standards, particularly regarding plagiarism, contribution to the advancement of knowledge in the field.

While language correction is not mandatory, reviewers may suggest improvements in writing style and clarity. The Managing Editor conducts a final language and style review and may request further revisions or return the manuscript to the authors for substantial editing if necessary.

Peer Review Procedure

When invited via email to review a submission, reviewers must respond using the provided link, indicating whether they accept or decline the request. If they agree, they follow the instructions on the journal's website and may either upload a review document or use the comment field.

Reviewers must choose one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept Submission – The manuscript meets all requirements and is ready for publication.

  • Revisions Required – Minor revisions are needed; the editor may or may not seek re-review.

  • Resubmit for Review – Major changes are required; a new round of peer review will follow.

  • Resubmit Elsewhere – The manuscript is unsuitable for PNJ in terms of scope or topic.

  • Decline/Reject Submission – The manuscript does not meet journal standards and contains significant flaws.

Timeline for Review

The review process duration depends on reviewer responsiveness. Typically, the initial review round at PNJ takes about two weeks but may extend to four weeks.

Final Decision

The author will receive a final verdict—acceptance or rejection—along with the reviewers’ feedback and any direct comments. The final decision is made by the Editor, who considers the reviewers' evaluations but retains full authority.