Review Policies

The editorial team of the Glovento Journal of Integrated Studies (GJIS) shall strictly follow comprehensive policies and procedures during the editorial and peer review process. These are established to ensure that:

• The manuscript is relevant to the aims and scope of GJIS.
• The research presented is innovative and of high quality.
• The manuscript follows the formatting and layout standards of GJIS.
• The language, grammar, and composition meet academic standards.

Manuscripts not adhering to the journal’s guidelines will be returned without undergoing scientific evaluation. GJIS follows a double-blind peer review process.

The review policy includes both editorial and peer review stages. Once a manuscript passes the editorial screening, it will be sent for double-blind peer review by experts of international standing. A manuscript must be approved by at least three relevant experts for publication. Authors' and reviewers' identities remain confidential until after publication.

Manuscripts are handled by the Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor. They are responsible for managing the manuscript according to GJIS procedures. Feedback from editors and reviewers will be shared with authors for revisions. Editors may recommend minor/major revisions, re-review, or outright rejection.

Initial checks include formatting, guideline compliance, and a plagiarism check. The editorial review typically concludes within 7–8 days after submission. If suitable, the manuscript is forwarded to a sub-editor for formatting, then sent to peer reviewers.

At least one local and one international reviewer of high academic standing will be selected. In special cases, two local and one foreign reviewer may be engaged—at least one local reviewer must hold a PhD or Postdoc from a developed country.

• Reviewers are selected based on expertise relevant to the manuscript’s topic.
• At least one reviewer will be from the region the manuscript focuses on, where applicable.
• Reviewers will assess the manuscript for relevance, originality, innovation, and research quality.

Authors must incorporate reviewer feedback and justify any disagreements with detailed explanations. The revised manuscript will be re-checked by editors to verify all changes were made as requested. Editors may consult advisory board members in case of conflicting reviews.

The Editor-in-Chief holds the final authority to accept or reject a manuscript. Once accepted, authors must format their paper according to the GJIS template. The final PDF version will be shared for author verification before online publication.

Peer Review Evaluation Criteria

Peer reviewers of GJIS evaluate each manuscript based on the following 10 criteria:

1. Title: Clear, specific, appropriate to content; uses active voice, ~10–15 words.
2. Abstract: Concise summary (180–200 words) covering problem, method, findings.
3. Keywords: 6–8 descriptive terms that extend the article's discoverability (not repeating title).
4. Introduction: Presents scope, background, rationale, hypotheses, methodology, and structure.
5. Literature Review: Describes and critically evaluates relevant studies to position the research.
6. Methodology: Clearly describes research design, data collection, and analytical methods with justification.
7. Results: Findings are presented logically, without interpretation, and aligned with the methodology.
8. Discussion: Interprets findings in the context of literature, discusses implications and links to objectives.
9. Conclusion: Synthesizes findings, shows significance, and offers future research directions.
10. Language and Style: Clear, objective, uses active voice, avoids jargon, follows academic English norms.