Peer review process

The ijli employs double-blind peer review processes to evaluate the submitted papers to ensure the quality of the Journal. All papers submitted to the journal need to be separated into two files, one without the authors' name, and the other with the authors'. Only papers without authors will be sent to peer reviewers to undergo the reviewing processes.

The peer-review process works as outlined below. It is expected to be completed within 8 weeks for articles selected for publication.

1. Submission of an original manuscript via electronic online submission;
2. Quick judgment by the Managing Editor of whether the manuscript fits the Aims and Scopes of the Journal. If it does not, the Author will be notified immediately with an e-mail of rejection;
3. The assignment will be sent to the Journal Editor;
4. The Journal editor will decide, based on the Aims and Scopes of the Journal and the quality of argumentation and the text in general, whether the manuscript is fit to undergo the peer review process;
5. Where a manuscript shows promise but suffers from severe problems (textual or otherwise), the Journal editor(s) may send the manuscript back to the author(s) for corrections and upgrading;
6. The Journal editor(s) select a minimum of 2 competent reviewers in the field and send them the manuscript aiming at the 2 to 3-week review. Selection of the reviewers will occur when the manuscript is accepted for the process's peer review phase. The reviewers provide a recommendation to the editors, justifications, and suggestions (if appropriate) and place the manuscript into one of the following categories:

   ( ) Accept submission

   ( ) Revision Required

   ( ) Reject and Resubmit for reviews 

   ( ) Reject & submit elsewhere

7. The Journal editor make decision based on the Reviewers’ Comments and his own judgment: reject & submit eslsewhere, reject & resubmit, minor revisions, major revisions, or accept.

8. The paper is either accepted for final publication or sent back to the authors for minor or major revision (with readability improvement suggestions by the editors), or else it is rejected.

On receipt of the corrected manuscript, the editorial team finalized the formatting and provided all necessary changes have been made; the manuscript is published in the journal.

Every effort will be made to publish accepted manuscripts within an 8-week window.

Download the Review Form

Please read each item carefully and select the response that best reflects your expertise.

Questions	Yes	Partially	No
Is the title of the study appropriate?
Does the abstract summarize the article clearly?
Does the introduction provide important issues in the field?
Is the purpose of the study stated clearly?
Does the study review adequate literature?
Does the study provide sound research methods, logical presentation with good validity and reliability?
Is the methodology consistent with the practice?
Are the results/findings innovative, which contribute to the field?
Is the presentation of the findings adequate and consistent?
Are the tables, figures, or charts arranged appropriately?
Does the discussion compare the results of the current study to previous studies presented in literature?
Are the conclusions and generalizations based on the findings?
Are the recommendation/suggestions meaningful, and based on the findings?
Do the references provide enough information in APA?
Is the language understandable and clear?
Does the article have cohesion throughout the writing?

Evaluation:

( ) Accept submission

( ) Accept with minor revisions

( ) Accept with major revisions

( ) Reject and Resubmit for reviews

( ) Reject without resubmission

Report

Sections of the manuscript	Comments
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Literature review
Methodology
Results/findings
Discussion
Conclusion & suggestions
References & citations
Language
Other issues