Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
Trends in Intellectual Property Research follows a robust double-blind peer review system to maintain high standards of academic quality, originality, and fairness in published scholarship. Under this model, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain concealed, ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated solely on their intellectual merit and minimizing potential bias. All research-based submissions undergo external peer review, while non-research content (such as editorials or book reviews) may be assessed internally by the Editor-in-Chief.
Stages of the Peer Review Process
1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s online system. Submissions must include an anonymized manuscript, a separate title page with author information, and any relevant supplementary materials.
2. Preliminary Editorial Screening
The editorial team conducts an initial evaluation to ensure the submission is complete, complies with author guidelines, and aligns with the journal’s scope. Manuscripts that fall outside the scope, lack academic rigor, or fail plagiarism checks may be declined at this stage.
3. Editorial Assignment
Eligible manuscripts are assigned to a Handling Editor, typically the Editor-in-Chief or a designated member of the Editorial Board.
4. Double-Blind Review
The Handling Editor selects at least two independent experts in the relevant field to review the manuscript. Reviewers are chosen based on subject expertise, independence, and absence of conflicts of interest. While authors may suggest potential reviewers, final selection remains at the Editor’s discretion.
5. Evaluation by Reviewers
Reviewers assess submissions based on criteria such as originality, contribution to intellectual property scholarship, analytical depth, methodological soundness (where applicable), clarity of expression, and adherence to ethical standards. Detailed feedback and recommendations are provided.
6. Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:
- Acceptance (rare at the initial stage)
- Minor revisions required
- Major revisions required
- Rejection
Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments along with the decision.
7. Revision and Resubmission
Where revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript within the stipulated timeframe, accompanied by a detailed response to reviewer comments. Depending on the extent of revisions, the manuscript may be re-evaluated by reviewers or decided by the Editor.
8. Final Acceptance and Production
Once the manuscript meets all academic and editorial standards, it is formally accepted. It then proceeds through copyediting, formatting, proofreading, and author approval of final proofs before publication.
Key Features of the Review System
- Double-Blind Integrity: Identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the process.
- Plagiarism Screening: All submissions are checked to ensure originality.
- Efficiency: The editorial team aims to provide timely decisions, subject to reviewer availability.
- Ethical Compliance: Reviewers and editors must disclose any conflicts of interest, and all ethical concerns are addressed in line with established publication standards.
This structured and transparent peer review framework ensures that all published work in Trends in Intellectual Property Research contributes meaningfully to the advancement of intellectual property scholarship through rigorous and unbiased evaluation.
