Researcher-written articles submitted to the Journal of Prison Education and Reentry (JPER) undergo a rigorous peer-review process before they are considered for publication. The purpose of this process is to ensure that published research meets appropriate standards of scholarly quality, methodological soundness, relevance, clarity, originality, and contribution to the fields of prison education, reentry, criminology, adult education, and related areas.
After a research manuscript is submitted to the journal, it is first reviewed by the editorial office to confirm that it falls within the journal’s scope and meets the basic submission requirements. At this stage, identifying information is removed from the manuscript before it is forwarded for scholarly evaluation. This process is intended to support an impartial assessment of the work based on its academic content rather than the identity or institutional affiliation of the author or authors.
The anonymized manuscript is then forwarded to the Associate Editor of Research. The Associate Editor conducts an initial assessment of the manuscript and determines whether it is suitable to proceed to external or editorial-board peer review. Manuscripts that are clearly outside the journal’s scope, do not meet basic scholarly standards, or are not sufficiently developed may be returned to the authors without full peer review.
For manuscripts that proceed to review, the Associate Editor of Research assigns the article to two or three members of the journal’s editorial board whose academic expertise and research interests are closely aligned with the subject matter of the submission. Reviewers are selected to provide informed, independent, and constructive evaluations of the manuscript.
Reviewers are generally asked to assess the manuscript in relation to its originality, significance, research design, methodology, theoretical framework, use of evidence, analysis, interpretation of findings, organization, clarity of presentation, engagement with relevant literature, and contribution to knowledge or practice. They may also identify areas where the manuscript requires clarification, additional evidence, methodological improvement, stronger analysis, or revision of its conclusions.
Each reviewer submits a written evaluation and recommendation to the Associate Editor of Research. Depending on the quality and readiness of the manuscript, reviewers may recommend acceptance, acceptance subject to revision, substantial revision and reconsideration, or rejection. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive comments that can assist authors in strengthening their work, regardless of the final recommendation.
After considering the reviewers’ reports, the Associate Editor of Research makes the editorial decision. The decision may be to accept the manuscript, request minor or major revisions, invite resubmission following substantial revision, or reject the manuscript. The Associate Editor may also seek additional review when the reviewers provide conflicting recommendations or when further specialist expertise is needed.
When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers’ and editor’s comments carefully and to submit a revised version of the manuscript together with an explanation of how the concerns raised during peer review have been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.
Acceptance for publication is not automatic following revision. The final decision is based on whether the revised manuscript has adequately addressed the substantive concerns identified during the review process and whether it meets the journal’s scholarly and editorial standards.
The peer-review process is designed to be fair, confidential, constructive, and academically rigorous. Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, respect the confidentiality of submitted work, disclose any potential conflicts of interest, and refrain from using unpublished information obtained through the review process for personal or professional advantage.
Once a researcher-written article has successfully completed peer review, revision, and final editorial approval, it is prepared for publication. Articles are published only after the journal is satisfied that the manuscript meets the standards expected of scholarly research published in JPER.
Practitioner-written contributions follow a different editorial process and are not subject to the same formal peer-review procedure. Such works are carefully selected and developed in consultation with the journal’s editors, and researcher-written and practitioner-written articles are clearly identified in the journal.