External Peer Review
Poorvam International Journal of Creative Arts and Cultural Expressions (PIJCACE) subjects scholarly manuscripts to double-blind review by independent external subject specialists before the editors reach a publication decision.
- Review Model
- Double-Blind Peer Review
- Reviewers
- Independent External Subject Specialists
- Minimum Reviewers
- 2
- Submission to Publication
- ~15 weeks (a target; may vary)
How Peer Review Works
Peer review is central to PIJCACE's editorial process. Every research submission passes through desk screening and is then evaluated by independent external subject specialists, who assess the manuscript without knowing the author's identity. Authors likewise do not know the identities of the reviewers.
Review is an evaluative scholarly process. Editorial decisions are based on a paper's importance, originality, validity and clarity, and its relevance to the journal's scope. The final decision rests with the editors, who consider the external review reports. Peer review does not guarantee acceptance or publication.
The Review Process, Step by Step
-
Submission of an Anonymised Manuscript
Authors upload two separate files: a title page containing author names, affiliations and contact details, and an anonymised manuscript that must not contain author names. Continuous line numbering is required so that reviewers can comment precisely.
-
Initial Desk Screening
The Managing Editor verifies scope and formatting and carries out a similarity check with Turnitin. An overall similarity index above 10%, or more than 5% from a single source, triggers mandatory editorial review. Turnitin is applied again if a revised version differs substantially, and again on the accepted text before typesetting.
-
Double-Blind External Review
A minimum of two independent external subject specialists evaluate the manuscript independently. Reviewers do not know the author's identity, and authors do not know the reviewers' identities. Editors ensure that reviewers are suitably qualified and receive guidance on what is expected of them.
-
Editorial Decision
The editors consider the external review reports and decide: Accepted, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Declined. Reviewer recommendations inform the decision but do not themselves constitute it.
-
Author Revision
Where revisions are requested, authors respond to every reviewer comment in the resubmitted article.
-
Copyediting, DOI Registration & Publication
Accepted manuscripts proceed to typesetting, Crossref DOI registration and open-access publication.
What Reviewers and Editors Assess
Decisions are based on the criteria below. PIJCACE does not use a numerical scoring rubric.
- Importance of the contribution to its field.
- Originality, including any concerns about plagiarism or redundant publication.
- Validity of the argument, analysis, methods or interpretation.
- Clarity of writing, structure and presentation.
- Relevance to the journal's scope.
- Ethical concerns, which reviewers are encouraged to bring to the editors' attention.
Decisions are not influenced by an author's nationality, race, gender, religion, political worldview or institutional affiliation.
Independence, Confidentiality & Conflicts of Interest
Reviewer duties
- Treat manuscripts as confidential documents and do not share, discuss or make use of their content.
- Decline the invitation if unqualified or unable to review promptly.
- Disclose any competing interests before agreeing to review.
- Give objective, clearly reasoned comments that authors can use to improve their work.
Editorial safeguards
- Reviewers are not approached where a conflict of interest is detected.
- Editors recuse themselves from submissions where they have a conflict of interest.
- Submissions by the Editor-in-Chief, editors or editorial board members are handled by an editor with no conflict, are sent to external reviewers, and remain anonymised.
- Authors may ask that particular individuals not review their article; the editors respect reasonable, practicable requests.
Reviewer identities and the content of submissions are kept confidential by editors and reviewers alike. The full duties of editors, reviewers and authors are set out in the Publishing Ethics & Malpractice Statement.
Editorial Decisions & Appeals
The possible outcomes are Accepted, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions and Declined. Reviewers' reports inform this decision; the editors make it.
An author may appeal a rejection once, in writing, giving reasoned grounds. Appeals are considered by an editor who was not involved in the original decision. Concerns about the editorial process may be sent to ethics@poorvam.com.
Review Timeline
The typical time from submission to publication is about 15 weeks. This is a target, not a guarantee, and actual timelines may vary with reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, revision requirements and editorial workload.
Author–Reviewer Anonymity
Identities are concealed in both directions during review. The diagram shows what each party sees.
Ethics, Integrity & Author Guidance
PIJCACE follows the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. PIJCACE is not a COPE member; it adopts these standards voluntarily. The detailed framework covering peer review, reviewer responsibilities, confidentiality, conflicts of interest and complaints is published in the Publishing Ethics & Malpractice Statement.
Authors should read the Author Submission Guidelines before submitting, including the requirements for the separate title page and anonymised manuscript. PIJCACE is a Diamond Open Access journal with no submission fees, article processing charges or reader fees.
Frequently Asked Questions
What type of peer review does PIJCACE use?
Double-blind peer review. Author identities are concealed from reviewers, and reviewer identities are concealed from authors, throughout evaluation.
Are manuscripts externally reviewed?
Yes. After desk screening, manuscripts are evaluated by independent external subject specialists. Submissions by editors or editorial board members are also sent to external reviewers.
How many reviewers are involved?
A minimum of two independent external subject specialists evaluate each manuscript independently.
Are reviewers anonymous to authors?
Yes. Reviewer identities are kept confidential from authors during the double-blind review process.
Are authors anonymous to reviewers?
Yes. Authors submit a separate title page containing their identities and an anonymised manuscript. Reviewers receive only the anonymised manuscript.
Which editorial decisions are possible?
Accepted, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Declined.
Can authors be asked to revise?
Yes. Where revisions are requested, authors are asked to respond to every reviewer comment in the resubmitted article.
Can an author appeal a rejection?
Yes, once, in writing and with reasoned grounds. The appeal is considered by an editor who was not involved in the original decision.
Who makes the final publication decision?
The editors, after considering the external peer-review reports. Reviewer recommendations inform the decision but do not themselves constitute it.
How long does the process take?
The typical time from submission to publication is about 15 weeks. This is a target and may vary.
Is peer review a guarantee of publication?
No. External peer review informs the editorial decision; acceptance and publication are not guaranteed.
Is PIJCACE a COPE member?
No. PIJCACE voluntarily adopts the COPE Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. See the Ethics & Malpractice Statement.
Is there a fee for submission or review?
No. PIJCACE is a Diamond Open Access journal with no submission fees, article processing charges, or reader fees.
Related Journal Policies
Last updated: September 30, 2026