Double-Blind Peer Review Procedure

The International Journal of Global Human Behavior Review (IJGHBR) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review system to ensure that all manuscripts are evaluated fairly, objectively, and transparently. In this model, the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed. This eliminates potential biases arising from institutional affiliation, professional reputation, seniority, nationality, or gender, and ensures that the assessment focuses solely on the scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, and practical relevance of the research.

1. Submission and Anonymization

Upon submission, authors must provide two separate files to facilitate the double-blind review process:

• Title Page: Includes complete author details, institutional affiliations, and acknowledgments. This file is strictly kept separate from the manuscript and is never shared with reviewers.
• Blinded Manuscript: Contains the full manuscript with all identifying information removed, including names, affiliations, acknowledgments, and references to the authors’ previous work. Self-citations are rewritten in third-person format to maintain anonymity.

The editorial office conducts an initial verification to ensure compliance with the journal’s submission guidelines. Manuscripts that are incomplete, improperly anonymized, or outside the scope of the journal are returned to the authors or rejected without peer review. This step ensures that only high-quality, relevant research proceeds to the review stage.

2. Editorial Pre-Screening

Before assigning reviewers, the editorial team performs a thorough pre-screening to maintain efficiency and quality:

• Scope Alignment: The Editor-in-Chief evaluates whether the manuscript contributes meaningfully to the journal’s focus on human behavior in global and transdisciplinary contexts.
• Plagiarism Detection: Submissions are cross-checked using iThenticate/Turnitin to ensure originality. Manuscripts exhibiting high similarity scores or redundant publication are rejected to uphold ethical standards.
• Technical Compliance: Manuscripts are verified for formatting, anonymization, and adherence to the journal’s style guide. Non-compliant submissions are returned for correction before peer review.

This preliminary screening typically takes 7 days and ensures that reviewers’ time is devoted only to high-quality manuscripts, while maintaining the integrity of the review process.

3. Reviewer Selection

The Editor-in-Chief assigns at least two independent reviewers with demonstrated expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their publication record, experience in peer review, and subject knowledge. Careful attention is given to avoid conflicts of interest, including institutional affiliations, previous collaborations with the authors, or recent co-authorships.

All correspondence between authors and reviewers is mediated exclusively through the editorial system. Direct communication is strictly prohibited to maintain confidentiality and prevent any influence on the review outcomes. The journal may also invite a third reviewer if initial reviews are conflicting or if additional expertise is required.

4. Double-Blind Review Process

Reviewers evaluate each manuscript according to rigorous criteria, including:

• Originality and significance of the research contribution
• Methodological rigor, including study design, data analysis, and interpretation of results
• Clarity, coherence, and organization of the manuscript
• Relevance to the field of global human behavior research
• Adherence to ethical standards, including ethical approval and informed consent, where applicable

The double-blind system ensures that the review process is impartial and focused entirely on scientific merit, without influence from author reputation, gender, or geographic location. Reviewers are expected to provide detailed, constructive feedback to assist the authors in improving the quality of their work.

5. Editorial Decision and Reconciliation

After reviewers submit their evaluations, the Editor-in-Chief carefully examines all reports. If reviewers’ opinions diverge significantly, an additional independent reviewer may be invited to provide further assessment. The editorial decision is based on the combined weight of the reviewers’ comments and the editor’s judgment. Decisions fall into the following categories:

Decision	Description
Accept as Is	Manuscript meets all technical and scholarly standards and is forwarded directly for DOI assignment and publication.
Minor Revisions	Manuscript is scientifically sound but requires minor textual, formatting, or referencing adjustments. Revisions are usually reviewed by the editor only.
Major Revisions	Significant revisions are needed, including additional analysis, structural changes, or theoretical enhancement. The revised manuscript undergoes a second round of double-blind peer review.
Reject	Manuscript contains fundamental methodological flaws, lacks novelty, or violates ethical standards. Rejection is final.

6. Timeline and Publication

The complete double-blind peer review process typically takes 6–7 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity. After acceptance, the production process—including final formatting, DOI assignment, and online publication—is completed within approximately 7 days. Authors are informed promptly of each stage of the review and production process.

7. Ethics, Transparency, and COPE Compliance

IJGHBR strictly adheres to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. All reviewer reports are anonymized and shared with authors to ensure transparency, facilitate constructive feedback, and enhance the quality of scholarly output. The journal maintains a high standard of ethical practice throughout the submission, review, and publication process, safeguarding both authors and reviewers.