+91 8686144086
info@colloquys.com
Maintaining scientific integrity and advancing knowledge through rigorous, transparent peer review
At Colloquys Journals, peer review is the central mechanism by which we maintain scientific integrity, advance knowledge, and ensure that work we publish is robust, reproducible, and useful to the scholarly community. Our peer review philosophy is guided by four interlocking commitments:
We follow a single-anonymized (single-blind) review policy in which reviewers' identities are concealed from authors while authors' names and affiliations are visible to reviewers. This approach is chosen to reduce retaliatory concerns and encourage candid critique while enabling reviewers to evaluate the manuscript in the context of the authors' prior work.
Editors actively monitor for potential bias arising from institutional or personal factors and will reassign reviewers or seek additional opinions when bias is suspected.
Peer review at Colloquys is constructive: Reviewers are asked not only to judge suitability for publication but also to provide actionable, evidence-based guidance that helps authors improve clarity, methodology, analysis, and interpretation.
Reviews should be formative—aimed at strengthening the scholarly contribution rather than only rejecting or endorsing it.
Every manuscript is assessed by reviewers with demonstrable expertise in the manuscript's domain. We require reviewers to evaluate methodological rigor, appropriateness of study design, statistical or analytical methods, completeness of reporting (including adherence to relevant reporting guidelines), and the plausibility of conclusions in light of the data.
Editorial decisions are accompanied by clear rationales and, where appropriate, annotated reviewer reports and editorial commentary. We aim for predictable timelines and open lines of communication, so authors understand the reasons behind decisions and the steps required for revision.
To ensure consistent, timely, and fair review, our editorial workflow proceeds through seven stages:
Upon receipt through the online submission portal, each manuscript undergoes an initial triage by editorial staff. This screening confirms:
Manuscripts that pass move to handling editor assignment. Manuscripts lacking essential elements or raising serious concerns may be returned with a constructive desk decision requesting revision, additional documentation, or withdrawal.
A Section or Handling Editor with relevant subject expertise is appointed. Their responsibilities include selecting reviewers, managing timelines, adjudicating reviewer disagreements, and issuing the provisional decision. The editor also ensures ethical compliance and that reviewer comments are constructive and non-defamatory.
We aim to invite a minimum of two independent reviewers for original research and at least one reviewer for short/brief reports depending on the manuscript type. Selection criteria include:
Editors may invite additional reviewers for complex or interdisciplinary manuscripts.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts against standardized criteria. They submit:
Reviewers are asked to grade or score core manuscript elements (e.g., originality, methods, clarity) and to identify essential vs. desirable revisions.
Taking reviewer recommendations and their own assessment into account, the editor issues one of the following decisions:
The manuscript is approved for publication, subject only to minor copyediting or proof corrections.
Changes requested are limited in scope and can be addressed in a single round without additional peer review.
Substantive changes are needed (e.g., additional analyses, clarification of methodology); the revised manuscript may return to one or more reviewers.
Manuscript is not suitable for publication due to fundamental flaws in design, analysis, or relevance.
Every decision is accompanied by a structured editorial letter that synthesizes reviewer input and clearly enumerates required changes.
Authors must submit:
Editors assess whether the authors' responses and revisions adequately address concerns. Major revisions may be re-sent to reviewers for verification.
Upon acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to production (copyediting, typesetting, proofing). Authors review proofs and confirm final corrections. After final sign-off, the article is published and indexed in relevant databases. Any post-publication corrections follow the journal's corrections and retractions policy.
Initial triage and compliance check
Handling editor with subject expertise appointed
Minimum 2 independent expert reviewers invited
Reviewers evaluate and provide feedback
Accept / Minor Revision / Major Revision / Reject
Point-by-point response and revised manuscript
Copyediting, proofing, and online publication
Through our rigorous peer review process, Colloquys ensures that every published article meets the highest standards of scientific integrity, methodological rigor, and scholarly value. We are committed to supporting authors throughout this journey while maintaining the trust of the global research community.