Peer-Review Policy

The Nature-Nurture Journal of Psychology (NNJP) maintains a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to ensure that all published manuscripts are original, scientifically valid, and of high quality. Independent experts in relevant fields evaluate each manuscript for originality, validity, and relevance, assisting the editorial team in upholding the journal’s high standards.

Reviewer Sourcing

• NNJP primarily manages the peer-review process through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform, which facilitates the identification and invitation of qualified reviewers.

  • In cases where a sufficient number of suitable reviewers cannot be identified within the journal’s network, the journal may supplement reviewer sourcing through external services to ensure timely evaluation.

  • Reviewers recruited through external sources receive a modest honorarium, regardless of their recommendation.

  • All peer-review reports are anonymized, unless the reviewer voluntarily chooses to disclose their identity.

Peer Review Models

NNJP employs multiple peer-review models depending on the manuscript and reviewer preferences:

• Single-blind: Reviewers know the authors’ identities; authors do not know the reviewers unless the reviewer signs their report.

• Double-blind: Both authors and reviewers are anonymous to each other, ensuring impartiality.

• Open peer review: Authors and reviewers know each other’s identities; signed reports are published alongside accepted articles.

• Transparent peer review: Reviewers know authors’ identities, but authors remain unaware unless the reviewer opts to sign; anonymized reports are published with the article.

Importance of Peer Review

Peer review ensures the credibility, accuracy, and impact of published research by:

• Enhancing robustness: Identifying gaps or weaknesses and suggesting clarifications or additional experiments.

• Improving readability: Providing feedback to make the manuscript clearer and more accessible.

• Increasing relevance: Assessing the manuscript’s significance in the broader field and ensuring meaningful contribution.

Peer Review Process

1. Initial Editorial Assessment: Manuscripts are evaluated for suitability and adherence to NNJP guidelines.

2. Reviewer Assignment: Qualified peer reviewers are selected to provide detailed assessments.

3. Recommendations: Based on reviewer feedback, the editorial team decides whether to accept, reject, or request revisions.

4. Final Decision: Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific validity and contribution to the field, not perceived interest or impact.

Editorial Oversight

• Editor-in-Chief: Holds overall responsibility for the journal.

• Section Editors: Oversee manuscripts submitted to specific journal sections.

• Associate Editors: May serve as handling editors for particular manuscripts.

• The editorial team ensures that the peer-review process adheres to best practices and ethical guidelines, maintaining the integrity and quality of all publications.