Peer review policy

EPSIR employs a rigorous double-blind external peer review process to ensure the publication of original and high-quality scientific work.

Peer Review System: Once a manuscript passes the Preliminary Review Stage conducted by the Editorial Committee, two or more external expert reviewers are assigned to assess the submission confidentially and anonymously (double-blind review). Reviewers will complete an official evaluation form provided by the journal. As a general rule, editors send each manuscript to two reviewers. In the event of conflicting assessments, editors reserve the right to appoint a third reviewer who will be unaware of the previous evaluations. This process safeguards impartiality, ethical integrity, and transparency, and ensures the overall quality of the final publication.

Review Timeline: The average review time in EPSIR is between 30 and 60 days. The editor will send the author the reviewers’ reports, along with any suggestions for revisions or, alternatively, the decision to reject the manuscript, accompanied by the corresponding reviewer comments. If necessary, the manuscript may be resubmitted to the reviewers for further evaluation until a final decision (acceptance or rejection) is reached. Authors will have 5 days to submit a revised version of the manuscript along with a justification of the changes made and, if applicable, an explanation for any suggested changes that were not implemented.

Internal Review Tracking System: EPSIR maintains an internal database that records and tracks all manuscript submissions and assigned reviewers. An annual list of reviewers is published at the end of each year.

Reviewer Selection Criteria: Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the subject area of the manuscript, ensuring a knowledgeable and fair evaluation. Reviewers are always external to the author’s institution and to the editorial committees of the journal.

Editorial Decision-Making

The criteria for acceptance or rejection of manuscripts are as follows:

Acceptance Criteria

  • Thematic relevance: The article must align with EPSIR’s focus on public and social innovation and contribute meaningfully to academic and institutional debate in the field.

  • Academic background of the authors: Authors’ research experience and presence in international scientific networks are considered.

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge: Manuscripts should present novel ideas, innovative conceptual frameworks, or previously unpublished results.

  • Methodological soundness: Research must demonstrate scientific rigor, using valid, reproducible data and appropriate methods.

  • Writing quality and clarity: Manuscripts must be well-structured, clearly written, and free from grammatical or stylistic errors.

  • Compliance with editorial guidelines: Submissions must follow EPSIR’s formatting, referencing, and style requirements.

  • Collaboration and internationalization: Co-authorships across institutions and countries, as well as interdisciplinary approaches, are viewed positively.

  • Institutional or financial support: Funding or institutional backing may indicate the relevance and scope of the research.

  • Ethical research conduct: The study must adhere to ethical standards in data collection, authorship, and scientific publication.

  • Use of up-to-date references: A recent and relevant bibliography is expected, avoiding excessive self-citation.

Rejection Criteria

  • Lack of thematic fit: Manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s scope will be rejected without peer review.

  • Low originality: Studies that merely replicate prior research without offering new insights will not be accepted.

  • Methodological weaknesses: Flaws in experimental design, data collection, or analysis can undermine the study’s validity.

  • Poor writing or structure: Unclear language or disorganized content hinders the assessment of the manuscript.

  • Inadequate referencing: Outdated sources or excessive self-citation may reduce the academic credibility of the article.

  • Ethical violations: Plagiarism, data manipulation, undeclared conflicts of interest, or any breach of research integrity will result in immediate rejection.

Final Evaluation and Notification

Once the evaluation process is complete, the corresponding author will be notified of the editorial decision, which may be one of the following: Accepted without Revisions; Accepted with Revisions; or Rejected. In all cases, the decision will be supported by the reviewers’ reports. If a manuscript is rejected, authors may express agreement or disagreement with the decision and provide comments or questions, which will be addressed within a maximum of 15 calendar days.

Plagiarism Prevention

As part of its ethical commitment, EPSIR subjects all manuscripts to plagiarism screening using specialized software. The resulting report is reviewed by the Editorial Committee and made available to reviewers upon request. Manuscripts with more than 25% similarity will not proceed to the peer review stage (see Anti-Plagiarism Policy). Reviewers may also use additional tools such as Grammarly, Google, or others to verify the originality of the text.

The journal adheres to the ethical framework of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applies its core practices and guidelines for editorial decision-making.