Peer Review Policy

Launched in July 2024. Global Strategic Pulse: CISSS Journal of Geopolitical & Geo-economic Studies (GSP) is a biannual research publication of the Center for International Strategic Studies Sindh (CISSS) focusing on traditional and non-traditional security challenges including global and regional strategic issues. GSP is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal conforming to the standards set by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan. Names of the author(s) and reviewer(s) are kept anonymous. 

Following steps are strictly followed to ensure the quality, rigor, and relevance of scholarly articles before they are published. Here’s a detailed outline of a standard review process at Global Strategic Pulse (GSP):

1. Submission

  • Author Submission: Researchers submit their manuscripts to the journal, typically via Open Journal System (OJS). The manuscript must follow the journal's submission guidelines, including formatting, originality, referencing style, and length limitations.

  • Initial Check: Upon submission, the journal’s editorial team conducts a preliminary check to ensure the manuscript complies with the journal's scope, formatting rules, and basic submission requirements.

2. Initial Editorial Review

  • Editor’s Assessment: The manuscript is initially reviewed by the journal’s editor or managing editor. This review includes assessing:

    • Relevance to Journal Scope: Whether the article fits within the journal's focus on international relations, political science, diplomacy, security studies, etc.

    • Quality and Clarity: An assessment of the manuscript’s clarity, logical structure, and overall presentation.

    • Preliminary Decision: The editor may make one of three decisions:

      • Desk Reject: If the manuscript is deemed unsuitable (e.g., out of scope, poor quality, lacks originality), it may be rejected without further review.

      • Send for Review: If the paper is deemed promising, it is sent out for peer review.

      • Revise and Resubmit: If the manuscript has merit but requires substantial revisions, the editor may ask the author to revise and resubmit.

3. Peer Review

  • Selection of Reviewers: The editor selects appropriate expert reviewers, typically 2 scholars or practitioners with expertise in the specific subfield of international relations addressed in the manuscript (e.g., security studies, foreign policy, international law, etc.).

    • Double-blind Peer Review:

      • Double-blind review: Neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other’s identities.

  • Review Criteria: Reviewers assess the manuscript based on various factors:

    • Originality: The contribution of the research to the field of international relations. Does it provide new insights or challenge existing paradigms?

    • Theoretical Foundation: The robustness of the theoretical framework or argument used in the study.

    • Methodology: The appropriateness and rigor of the research design, data collection, and analysis.

    • Clarity and Structure: The organization, clarity, and coherence of the manuscript.

    • Literature Review: The depth and relevance of the literature review, and the manuscript’s relationship to existing research in the field.

    • Policy or Practical Implications: Relevance to international relations practice, policy implications, or contemporary issues in the field.

  • Review Report: Reviewers submit a detailed report with their comments, which may include:

    • Accept with Minor Revisions: The manuscript is mostly satisfactory, but minor adjustments (e.g., language, references) are needed.

    • Accept with Major Revisions: Significant changes are required, often regarding theoretical or methodological issues.

    • Reject: The paper is not suitable for publication, often due to serious flaws in methodology, conceptualization, or relevance.

4. Editorial Decision

  • Editor’s Evaluation: The editor evaluates the peer review feedback, and based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, makes a final decision:

    • Accept: If the reviewers and editor are satisfied, the paper is accepted for publication.

    • Revise and Resubmit: The author is invited to revise the manuscript according to feedback of the reviewers. Authors must address all concerns and resubmit the revised manuscript for another round of review, which may involve the same reviewers or new ones.

    • Reject: If the manuscript is fundamentally flawed or not aligned with the journal’s scope, it is rejected.

  • Communication with Author: The editor communicates the decision to the author(s), along with reviewer feedback and, if applicable, a request for revisions.

5. Revisions and Resubmission

  • Revised Submission: If invited, the author revises the manuscript and resubmits it to the journal. This may require addressing specific concerns raised by the reviewers, improving sections of the paper, or providing additional data or analysis.

  • Review of Revisions: Once the paper is resubmitted, it may go through another round of review (often involving the original reviewers) to ensure that the issues have been addressed properly.

  • Final Decision: After reviewing the revisions, the editor makes a final decision:

    • Final Acceptance: If the revisions meet the reviewers' and editor’s expectations, the paper is accepted.

    • Further Revisions or Rejection: In some cases, additional revisions may be required, or the paper may be rejected if it still does not meet the journal’s standards.

6. Production and Publication

  • Copyediting and Formatting: Once the manuscript is accepted, it undergoes professional copyediting, which includes proofreading, ensuring consistency in formatting, and making sure it adheres to the journal's style guide (e.g., referencing style).

  • Typesetting: The article is typeset and prepared for online or print publication.

  • Proofs: Authors may receive page proofs to review for any final corrections or typographical errors.

  • Final Publication: The article is published in the journal. In many cases, this is first as an online early release, followed by inclusion in the next issue of the journal.

7. Post-Publication

  • Dissemination: The article is made available to readers through the journal’s platform, with promotion through various academic channels, social media, or conferences.

  • Citations and Impact: The article's impact on the field is tracked, including citation counts, downloads, and mentions in media or policy discussions. Global Strategic Pulse (GSP) provides a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) for easy access and citation.

Additional Considerations

  • Ethical Standards: Global Strategic Pulse (GSP) adheres to ethical standards, ensuring that research is original, authorship is appropriately attributed, and there is no plagiarism.

  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers and authors must disclose any conflicts of interest. The editor ensures that these are managed appropriately to maintain the integrity of the review process.

  • Open Access: Global Strategic Pulse (GSP) has embraced open access, meaning that articles are freely accessible online, often for a fee. 

By following this structured and rigorous process, Global Strategic Pulse (GSP) maintains the integrity and credibility of the academic field in accordance with the standards set by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan, ensuring that published works contribute valuable knowledge and insights.