The Peer Review Process
There are six main stages to the review process:
Stage 1 – Editors’ Assessments
When the editors receive a manuscript for potential inclusion in either the Articles or Short Notes sections of JOTA, they will first assess it to see whether or not they feel that it is suitable for further consideration. They may also ask other experts for their views on an informal basis before deciding whether to reject a paper, ask the authors to revise and resubmit it, or send it out for formal review.
Stage 2 – Peer Reviewer Selection
Should the editors decide that the article or short note is suitable for further consideration, they will send out review invitations to suitably qualified peer reviewers with appropriate expertise. Usually, they will attempt to obtain two reviewers for each paper.
If you receive a review invitation from the Journal of Tax Administration, please read our “Peer Reviewer Responsibilities” carefully and ensure that you are able to meet these before agreeing to provide the review.
We operate a double-blind peer review process, so we will not disclose the names of the authors of any paper that you review before the paper has been published unless legally obliged to. We will not disclose your name to the authors at any stage of the process unless legally obliged to.
If you are unable to review the paper for us, we would appreciate it if you could let us know as soon as possible. In addition, if you are able to provide suggestions for alternative reviewers, please do so.
Stage 3 – Writing and Submitting the Review
When sending articles or short notes out for review, the editors will include a review form, as well as a copy of the paper and any other relevant documentation submitted. We will also provide you with a timescale for submitting the review. If you require additional time, please let us know.
The review form should be completed and returned to JOTA by the deadline agreed. You may also wish to annotate the manuscript that you are reviewing. If so, please do so using Microsoft Word’s Track Changes and Comments facilities, and ensure that your annotations are anonymised.
We will usually ask you to recommend one of the following courses of action:
- Accept for publication (subject to minor corrections).
- Resubmit with minor revisions.
- Resubmit with major revisions.
- Consider as a comment paper (not refereed).
- Reject.
We will also ask you to provide full details of your reasons for your recommendation and any revisions that you believe the author/s should make. You’ll find more information about what to take into consideration when writing your review on our Peer Reviewer Responsibilities page.
Stage 4 – The Editors’ Decision
The editors will consider all peer reviews received in respect of the article or short note. They will then either:
- Accept the article or short note.
- Accept the article or short note subject to corrections.
- Ask the author/s to revise the article or short note and resubmit it for further consideration.
- Ask the author/s to consider revising their work as a commentary (which would not need to be peer reviewed and would be assessed by the editors).
- Reject the article or short note.
The editors will take the peer reviewers’ opinions and recommendations into account when making their decision. However, the editors’ decisions may not always reflect those of the reviewers.
Stage 5 – Reviewing Revised Manuscripts
When the journal receives a revised manuscript, the editors will assess it in the first instance. They will then decide whether or not to send it to the original peer reviewers for further consideration. If they decide to send you the revised version of an article or short note that you reviewed, they will send you the revised paper, an anonymised copy of all of the reviewers’ comments, the author’s responses to these comments, and any other relevant documentation.
Please provide your review of the revised paper to JOTA as soon as possible and by any deadline agreed with the editors. If you wish to annotate the manuscript that you are reviewing, please do so using Microsoft Word’s Track Changes and Comments facilities, and ensure that your annotations are anonymised.
Once the editors have received the peer reviews of the revised version of the article or short note, they will assess it according to the process laid out in Stage 4. If we ask the author or authors to make further revisions to their manuscript, it is possible that we may need to send you further versions for consideration. However, we try to ensure that we do not ask reviewers to review more versions of an article or short note than absolutely necessary.
Stage 6 - Outcome Updates
Once the editors have made a final decision about an article or short note that you have reviewed (i.e. whether to accept or reject it), we will notify you about their decision.
See also:
