Peer review process

Global Confluence Reviews uses a double-blindpeer-review model for research articles: authors do not know reviewers' identities, and reviewers are not told authors' names or affiliations. This helps reduce bias and keep the focus on the quality of the manuscript.

What happens after submission

1. Editorial screening.The editorial office checks formatting, scope fit, and ethical basics (e.g. plagiarism signals, competing submissions). Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope may be declined without external review.
2. Reviewer invitation. Suitable manuscripts are sent to at least two independent experts. We seek reviewers with relevant subject expertise and a record of fair, constructive assessment.
3. Decision. The Editor-in-Chief or handling editor weighs reviewer comments and their own reading to recommend acceptance, minor or major revision, or rejection. Authors receive anonymized comments to guide revisions.
4. Revisions. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the same or new reviewers when substantial changes are made.

Typical timelines

Timelines vary by field and reviewer availability. As a guide, first decisions after peer review often fall in the 8–12 week range, though delays can occur when specialist reviewers are scarce. Authors are welcome to contact the editorial office for a status update after a reasonable interval.

Expectations for reviewers

• Declare conflicts of interest and decline invitations when appropriate.
• Evaluate methodology, argument, and contribution—not personal views alone.
• Provide specific, actionable feedback for authors and editors.
• Respect confidentiality: do not share manuscripts or use ideas unfairly.

Questions about the process? Email editor@example.com.