Peer-review Policy

Peer Review Policy

The Galla Journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of scholarly integrity and ensuring the publication of rigorous, valid, and credible research. To achieve this, all submitted manuscripts undergo a comprehensive double-blind peer review process that ensures impartiality and confidentiality.

  1. Initial Manuscript Assessment

All submissions to the Galla Journal are initially assessed by the editorial team for completeness, adherence to guidelines, and alignment with the journal's focus and scope. Manuscripts meeting these criteria are assigned to a Handling Editor, who determines their suitability for peer review.

If a Handling Editor has a potential conflict of interest or is an author of the manuscript, another member of the Editorial Board will oversee the peer review process. The editorial team reserves the right to desk-reject manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s scope and quality standards.

  1. Double-Blind Peer Review Process

The Galla Journal follows a double-blind peer review process, meaning that the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. This process is designed to ensure fairness, eliminate bias, and maintain high scientific rigor.

  1. The Handling Editor assigns at least two independent expert reviewers to evaluate the manuscript.
  2. Reviewers assess the manuscript based on originality, validity, significance, methodology, and clarity.
  3. The reviewers’ reports are submitted to the Handling Editor along with their recommendations.
  4. Authors receive anonymized reviewer feedback and are given the opportunity to address concerns in a revised manuscript if required.
  5. The final decision (Acceptance, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Rejection) is made by the Editorial Board based on reviewers’ recommendations.
  1. Selection and Diversity of Peer Reviewers

The selection of reviewers is a critical part of the publication process. Reviewers are chosen based on:

  • Expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript.
  • Reputation and recommendations from scholars in the field.
  • Absence of conflicts of interest with the authors.
  • Commitment to providing thorough, constructive, and timely reviews.

Galla Journal is committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion in its peer review process and encourages the selection of reviewers from various geographical regions and backgrounds.

  1. Ethical Considerations and Reviewer Conduct

Reviewers must adhere to ethical standards outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including:

  • Conducting objective and fair evaluations, free of personal bias.
  • Providing constructive feedback with clear reasoning and references.
  • Maintaining confidentiality of the manuscript content and review process.
  • Declaring any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.
  • Not using unpublished material from the manuscript for personal research.

Any breach of ethical conduct by a reviewer may result in their removal from the journal’s reviewer database.

  1. Editorial Decisions and Revisions

The Editorial Board makes final publication decisions based on the reviewers’ feedback and the journal’s ethical and academic standards. Decisions fall into the following categories:

  • Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted for publication without further changes.
  • Minor Revision: The manuscript requires small modifications before final acceptance.
  • Major Revision: The manuscript needs substantial improvements before further consideration.
  • Rejection: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards and will not be considered further.

Authors must submit revised manuscripts within the specified deadline, addressing all reviewer concerns. If revisions are unsatisfactory, further rounds of review may be required.

  1. Confidentiality and Integrity

All aspects of the editorial and peer review process are strictly confidential. Editors, reviewers, and authors must adhere to confidentiality guidelines to maintain the integrity of the review process.

The Galla Journal is dedicated to ensuring ethical publication practices and adheres to international standards, including COPE guidelines. Any ethical misconduct in the peer review process, such as falsification of data, plagiarism, or biased reviews, will be addressed with appropriate corrective actions, including retraction of the manuscript if necessary.

  1. Appeals and Disputes

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions if they believe their manuscript was unfairly rejected. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief, providing detailed justifications and evidence to support their claims. The editorial team will review the appeal and, if necessary, consult external experts before making a final decision.

  1. Timeliness of the Peer Review Process

The Galla Journal aims to provide an efficient and timely peer review process. The typical timeline for peer review is as follows:

  • Initial editorial assessment: 1-2 weeks
  • Peer review completion: 4-6 weeks
  • Author revisions (if required): 2-4 weeks
  • Final editorial decision: 2 weeks

While efforts are made to expedite the process, ensuring thorough and high-quality reviews remains the priority.