Review Process

Comprehensive Guide to the Peer Review Process

JCRELC follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scholarly contribution of all published research. This page provides a detailed overview of the review process for authors and reviewers.

The Journal of Creative Research in English Literature and Culture (JCRELC) is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, and constructive peer review process. All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a thorough evaluation by independent experts to ensure academic excellence and scholarly integrity.

1. Process Overview

1

Submission

Author submits manuscript

2

Initial Screening

Editorial assessment

3

Reviewer Assignment

Experts selected

4

Peer Review

Double-blind evaluation

5

Decision

Editorial determination

6

Revisions

Author response

2. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on the following criteria:

Selection Criteria

Subject Matter Expertise: Demonstrated expertise in the manuscript's topic area
No Conflict of Interest: No personal, financial, or professional conflicts
Review History: Previous review quality and timeliness
Geographic Diversity: International representation
Academic Experience: Publication record and research experience

Author Suggestions

Authors may suggest potential reviewers during submission. Suggested reviewers should:

Have expertise in the subject area
Have no conflicts of interest
Not be from the same institution
Not be recent collaborators

The Editor reserves the right to accept or reject suggestions.

3. Evaluation Criteria

Originality & Innovation

Novel contribution to the field
Original research or theoretical framework
Fresh perspective on existing scholarship
Significance to the discipline

Methodological Rigor

Appropriate research methodology
Sound theoretical framework
Valid analytical approaches
Proper citation and attribution

Clarity & Presentation

Clear and concise writing
Logical structure and organization
Quality of argumentation
Adherence to formatting guidelines

Contribution & Impact

Contribution to scholarly discourse
Practical or theoretical implications
Relevance to contemporary issues
Potential for future research

Ethical Compliance

Ethical approval for research
Conflict of interest disclosure
Proper attribution and citation
Compliance with journal policies

Literature & Context

Comprehensive literature review
Appropriate contextualization
Engagement with current scholarship
Proper citation of key works

4. Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewer Responsibilities

Confidentiality: Keep manuscripts confidential
Objectivity: Provide unbiased, constructive feedback
Timeliness: Meet review deadlines
Conflict Disclosure: Declare any potential conflicts
Constructive Feedback: Provide specific, actionable comments
Acknowledgment of Limits: Decline if outside expertise

Prohibited Actions

Sharing manuscripts with others
Uploading manuscripts to AI tools
Contacting authors directly
Using unpublished information for personal advantage
Intentionally delaying reviews
Copying manuscripts for personal use

Review Report Structure

Summary

Brief overview of manuscript content and its contribution to the field

Major Comments

Significant issues affecting publication decision, with specific suggestions

Minor Comments

Specific suggestions for improvement in writing, formatting, or presentation

Confidential Comments: Additional notes for editors only may be included in a separate section.

5. Editorial Decisions

Decision	Meaning	Next Steps
Accept	Manuscript accepted as is or with minor proofreading	Proceed to production
Minor Revision	Small changes required (clarifications, additional references, etc.)	Revise and resubmit (14 days)
Major Revision	Significant changes required (additional analysis, re-theorization, etc.)	Revise and resubmit (30 days)
Reject	Manuscript does not meet journal standards or has fatal flaws	May resubmit as new submission if substantially revised
Revise & Resubmit	Potentially acceptable after major revision (not guaranteed)	Revise and resubmit as new submission

Decision Factors: Editors consider reviewer recommendations, scholarly validity, originality, relevance to journal scope, quality of presentation, and ethical compliance when making final decisions.

6. Timeline

2-3

Weeks for Initial Decision

14

Days for Reviewer Review

14-30

Days for Author Revision

4-6

Weeks Total Review Time

Fast-Track Review

For urgent research, our expedited review offers a decision within 3 weeks. This service requires prior approval and may involve additional processing fees.

Contact: info@jcrelc.com for fast-track inquiries.

Frequently Asked Questions

The initial editorial screening takes 3-5 working days. The peer review process typically takes 4-6 weeks. Final editorial decisions are usually communicated within 1-2 weeks after receiving reviewer reports.

Yes, authors may suggest potential reviewers during submission. Suggested reviewers should have expertise in the subject area and no conflicts of interest. The Editor may or may not use suggested reviewers.

Yes, authors may request exclusion of specific reviewers with a valid reason (e.g., conflict of interest, professional rivalry). The Editor will consider such requests but is not obligated to honor them.

Yes, authors may appeal editorial decisions. Please refer to our Complaints and Appeals Policy for the formal appeals process and requirements.

Yes, all reviewer comments (anonymized) are shared with authors along with the editorial decision letter, regardless of whether the decision is acceptance, revision, or rejection.

Related Pages

Peer Review Policy

Reviewer Guidelines

Become a Reviewer

Reviewer Ethics

Confidentiality Policy

Complaints & Appeals

Questions About the Review Process?

For questions about the review process, reviewer invitations, or editorial decisions, please contact our editorial office.

Email:
info@jcrelc.com
info.jcrelc@gmail.com

Phone:
+91-7665235235

Response Time: Within 2 business days for all review-related inquiries.

Please include "REVIEW PROCESS QUERY" along with your manuscript ID (if applicable) in the email subject line for faster response.