Peer Review Process

All types of articles to be published in RJPLS journal undergo thorough peer review. This usually involves a closed peer review system where the manuscripts are reviewed by two independent peer reviewers.

Peer review policy

All submissions to RJPLS journal will first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief, for consideration of suitability and quality. Once screened by the Editor-in-Chief it will further move for reviewer.  Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review by appropriate independent experts identified by the handling Editor. Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ reports and the corresponding author will be sent the reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript. Authors should note that final acceptance will depend the comments given by both the reviewers and even in light of one positive report.

Closed peer review

RJPLS operate a closed peer review process. Reviewers will be treated anonymously and the pre-publication history of each article will not be made available online.

Peer reviewers

Authors may suggest potential reviewers if they wish; however, whether or not to consider these reviewers is at the Editor’s discretion. Authors should not suggest recent collaborators or colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves. Authors who wish to suggest peer reviewers can do so in the cover letter and should provide institutional email addresses where possible, or information which will help the Editor to verify the identity of the reviewer (for example an ORCID or Scopus ID).

Authors may request exclusion of individuals as peer reviewers, but they should explain the reasons in their cover letter on submission. Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this may hinder the peer review process. Please note that the Editor may choose to invite excluded peer reviewers.


Editors will treat all manuscripts submitted to RJPLS journal in confidence. Reviewers are also required to treat manuscripts confidentially. RJPLS will not share manuscripts with third parties outside of RJPLS.


RJPLS takes seriously all allegations of potential misconduct. We follow the required guidelines outlining how to deal with cases of suspected misconduct.

In cases of suspected research or publication misconduct, it may be necessary for the Editor to contact and share manuscripts with third parties, for example, author(s)’ institution(s) and ethics committee(s).

Research misconduct

All research involving humans (including human data and human material) and animals must have been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework. If there is suspicion that research has not taken place within an appropriate ethical framework, the Editor may reject a manuscript and may inform third parties, for example, author(s)’ institution(s) and ethics committee(s). In cases of proven research misconduct involving published articles, or where the scientific integrity of the article is significantly undermined, articles may be retracted.

Publication misconduct

RJPLS journals will follow the HOPE guidelines outlining how to deal with cases of potential publication misconduct.


RJPLS uses plagiarism detection software.

Corrections and retractions

Rarely, it may be necessary for RJPLS to publish corrections to, or retractions of, articles published in its journals, so as to maintain the integrity of the academic record. In line with RJPLS’s permanency policy, corrections to, or retractions of, published articles will be made by publishing a Correction or a Retraction note bi-directionally linked to the original article. Any alterations to the original article will be described in the note. The original article remains in the public domain and the subsequent correction or retraction will be widely indexed. In the exceptional event that material is considered to infringe certain rights or is defamatory, we may have to remove that material from our site and archive sites.

Authors, readers or organizations who become aware of errors or ethics issues in a published article are encouraged to contact the journal in the first instance via the contact details available on the journal website. All reports will be considered by the Editors; additional expert advice may be sought when deciding on the most appropriate course of action.


Changes to published articles that affect the interpretation and conclusions of the article, but do not fully invalidate the article, will, at the Editor(s)’ discretion, be corrected via publication of a correction that is indexed and bi-directionally linked to the original article.


On rare occasions, when the interpretation or conclusions of an article is substantially undermined, it may be necessary for published articles to be retracted. Retraction notices are indexed and bi-directionally linked to the original article. The original article is watermarked as retracted and the title is amended with the prefix “Retracted article:”

Editorial Expressions of Concern

When an Editor becomes aware of serious concerns regarding interpretation or conclusions of a published article, they may choose to publish a statement alerting the readership. Scenarios in which Editorial Expressions of Concern may be published include prolonged investigations of very complex cases and when the concerns may have a significant and immediate impact on public health or public policy. An Editorial Expression of Concern may be superseded by a subsequent Correction or Retraction, but will remain part of the permanent published record.