Editorial policies
The International Journal of Body, Mind and Culture (IJBMC) is committed to maintaining high standards of editorial integrity, scholarly quality, and ethical publishing practice. The journal’s editorial policies are designed to ensure a fair, rigorous, and independent evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.
Selection of Editors
Editors are selected on the basis of their academic expertise, subject relevance, publication record, editorial experience, and familiarity with recognized standards of publication ethics. Editorial appointments are made with attention to scholarly competence, ethical responsibility, and the needs of the journal’s scope.
Initial Editorial Assessment
All newly submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment before external peer review. At this stage, the journal evaluates:
- the manuscript’s fit with the aims and scope of the journal;
- compliance with the journal’s submission requirements;
- completeness of the submission files;
- basic quality of presentation and structure;
- ethical and disclosure requirements;
- originality and possible textual overlap through similarity-checking tools.
Manuscripts may be returned to authors for technical correction or may be declined without external review if they do not meet the journal’s minimum editorial standards.
Selection of Peer Reviewers
The journal uses a double-anonymized peer review process. Peer reviewers are selected by the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor on the basis of subject expertise, academic experience, publication record, and the absence of relevant conflicts of interest. Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the final selection of reviewers remains entirely at the discretion of the journal.
Editorial Evaluation and Decisions
Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment are sent for external peer review and are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. Reviewer reports are assessed by the handling editor and/or editorial leadership, who evaluate the comments in light of the journal’s standards for scholarly quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and relevance to scope.
Editorial decisions are reached on the basis of reviewer reports and editorial judgment. Possible decisions include:
- accept;
- minor revision;
- major revision;
- reject.
Assessment of Revised Manuscripts
Revised manuscripts are assessed according to the nature of the editorial decision. In cases of minor revision, the revised submission may be evaluated by the handling editor. In cases of major revision, the manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or sent for further external review, depending on the extent of the revisions required.
Role of the Editorial Board
Members of the Editorial Board support the journal’s scholarly and editorial standards. Depending on their assigned role, they may contribute to manuscript handling, peer review oversight, policy development, and broader editorial guidance. Editorial Board membership does not guarantee involvement in every individual manuscript decision.
Final Decision
The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief, who considers reviewer reports, editorial recommendations, and the journal’s editorial policies before making a decision.
Communication with Authors
Editorial decisions and requests for revision are communicated to authors through the journal’s editorial office or submission system. Authors are expected to respond to editorial and reviewer comments in a clear and timely manner.
Editorial Independence
All editorial decisions are made independently and on scholarly grounds. Editorial evaluation, peer review, and publication decisions are not influenced by payment status, waiver requests, or non-scholarly considerations.
