Peer Review Process

Ensuring Academic Integrity and Quality

All research articles submitted to JPGA undergo a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process. This means that the identity of the reviewers is concealed from the authors, and vice versa, throughout the review process to ensure an objective and unbiased evaluation.

1

Initial Screening

The Managing Editor evaluates the manuscript for its fit within the journal's scope, adherence to author guidelines, and initial plagiarism check (similarity index below 20%). Papers that do not meet the basic criteria are rejected immediately.

2

Double-Blind Review

The manuscript is sent to at least two independent experts in the field. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript's novelty, methodology, logical flow, and contribution to political and governance studies.

3

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

Review Criteria

  • Theoretical Originality
  • Methodological Rigor
  • Clarity of Discussion
  • Policy Relevance
  • Reference Quality (APA 7th)
  • Ethical Compliance
Review Timeline: JPGA aims to provide the first decision within 2–4 weeks from the date of submission. The entire process from submission to publication typically takes 4–6 months.