Peer review process
Peer Review Process
In order to meet the evaluation standards for scientific publications and maintain its classification in the highest category (“Class A”), the Journal adopts a peer review process. For reasons of transparency, its procedures are outlined below.
Type of Review - The Journal employs a double-blind peer review process: authors do not know the identity of reviewers, and reviewers do not know the identity of authors. Submissions must be provided in two versions: one identifiable version intended for publication, and one anonymized version for reviewers, containing no references—within the text, notes, or metadata—that could directly or indirectly reveal the author’s identity.
Consent - By submitting a manuscript, the author consents to its evaluation by an expert in the relevant or a related academic field, selected by the Editorial Board.
Rules and Exceptions - All submitted contributions are subject to peer review and will include the note “Contribution subject to peer review.”
Exceptions apply only to those categories exempted under ANVUR regulations on the classification of academic journals. Similarly, editorials and contributions in the section “A chiare lettere,” as well as in the subsections “Confronti” and “Transizioni,” are not subject to review.
The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject submissions that are merely compilatory or lack the necessary standards of scientific rigor, originality, or relevance.
Evaluation Criteria - Peer review shall not be influenced by the author’s personal beliefs, theoretical orientations, or academic affiliations, and shall be based exclusively on the following five criteria: originality of the research framework and results; critical knowledge of the relevant scholarly literature and case law; methodological soundness; formal and substantive internal coherence (between title, outline, and abstract, and with respect to the author’s theoretical position); clarity and formal correctness of the exposition.
Duties and Responsibilities of the Reviewer - The reviewer entrusted with the evaluation of a manuscript shall:
– strictly adhere to the evaluation criteria listed above;
– treat the manuscript as confidential until publication and destroy all electronic and printed copies of unpublished articles and their own reports once receipt has been confirmed by the Editorial Office;
– take due account of the author’s academic seniority and qualification, known only in anonymized form (doctoral candidate, PhD holder, postdoctoral fellow, researcher, associate professor, full professor, judge, etc.);
– not disclose to others which manuscripts they have reviewed, nor disseminate such manuscripts in whole or in part;
– assign a score from a minimum of 1 to a maximum of 5 for each of the five criteria, using a dedicated evaluation form to be transmitted to the Editor-in-Chief for exclusive and confidential use;
– provide a concise free-form assessment addressing originality, methodological rigor, and formal quality, exercising objectivity, prudence, and respect.
Outcomes - Possible outcomes of the review are:
(a) not publishable;
(b) not publishable unless revised, with reasons specified;
(c) publishable after minor revisions or additions, to be detailed;
(d) publishable (subject, where applicable, to editorial adjustments in line with formatting guidelines).
Except in case (d), the outcome is communicated to the author while preserving reviewer anonymity. A positive decision requires an overall rating of at least “good” (minimum total score of 15, with no score of 1 and no more than two scores of 2).
Confidentiality - Reviewers and members of the Editorial Board, Scientific Committee, and Editorial Staff undertake to maintain strict confidentiality regarding evaluation forms and judgments, including after publication.
Reviewers - Reviewers are selected among Italian and international scholars, both tenured and non-tenured, with expertise in GIUR-07 or related fields, who are available to complete evaluations within a short timeframe (generally two weeks) and who accept the Journal’s review criteria and procedures.
