Editorial Process

Submission & Publication Workflow

From manuscript submission to online publication, GRPJ follows a 14-step editorial workflow designed to be efficient, fair, and transparent.

Editorial Workflow

  1. 1

    Manuscript Submission

    Authors submit the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief through email at journal.grp@gmail.com.

  2. 2

    Administrative Screening

    The Editorial Office verifies completeness of submission files, manuscript formatting, adherence to author guidelines, completeness of declarations, anonymization, reference formatting, and quality of figures and tables. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned for technical revision.

  3. 3

    Editorial Screening (Desk Evaluation)

    The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor evaluates relevance to scope, originality, scholarly significance, methodological quality, language clarity, ethical compliance, and overall readiness for peer review. Manuscripts may be desk-rejected at this stage.

  4. 4

    Similarity Screening

    Before external review, manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software. Where concerns arise, authors may be asked for clarification or to revise before peer review.

  5. 5

    Reviewer Selection

    The handling editor invites at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise, selected for subject expertise, publication record, reviewing experience, absence of conflicts of interest, and availability.

  6. 6

    Double-Blind Peer Review

    Reviewers independently evaluate originality, significance, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, presentation of results, discussion and conclusions, quality of references, and overall contribution to scholarship and policy.

  7. 7

    Editorial Decision

    Following peer review, the handling editor evaluates reviewer reports and recommends an editorial decision. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision.

  8. 8

    Author Revision

    When revisions are requested, authors submit a revised manuscript, a point-by-point response to reviewer comments, revised supplementary materials, and an explanation when a recommendation is not adopted. Extensions may be granted upon reasonable request.

  9. 9

    Secondary Evaluation

    Revised manuscripts are evaluated by the handling editor. For major revisions, the revised version may be returned to the original reviewers, and additional revisions may be requested when necessary.

  10. 10

    Final Acceptance

    When all editorial and reviewer concerns have been satisfactorily addressed, the Editor-in-Chief issues a formal acceptance decision and authors receive an official acceptance notification.

  11. 11

    Copyediting

    Accepted manuscripts undergo professional copyediting to improve grammar, spelling, punctuation, consistency, formatting, references, and adherence to journal style, without altering scientific content.

  12. 12

    Typesetting and Proof Production

    Manuscripts are professionally typeset for publication. The corresponding author receives page proofs to verify formatting, figures, tables, equations, references, author information, and typographical accuracy. Only minor corrections are permitted at this stage.

  13. 13

    Publication

    Following approval of the proof, each published article receives final citation details, page numbers or article number, a DOI where available, a publication date, and online publication in the journal archive. GRPJ follows a continuous publication model — accepted articles are published online individually as soon as they are ready, rather than waiting to be grouped into a scheduled issue.

  14. 14

    Post-Publication

    The Editorial Office monitors published articles for requests for corrections, ethical concerns, reader comments, post-publication discussions, allegations of misconduct, and citation and indexing records, publishing errata, corrigenda, expressions of concern, or retractions where appropriate.

Workflow Timeline

The journal strives to complete the editorial process efficiently while maintaining rigorous peer-review standards. These timelines are targets and may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the extent of revisions required.

Editorial StageTarget Time
Submission acknowledgmentWithin 2 working days
Administrative screening3–5 working days
Editorial screeningWithin 7 working days
Similarity screeningConcurrent with editorial screening
Reviewer invitationWithin 7 days
Peer review21–28 days
Editorial decisionWithin 14 days after review
Minor revision by authorsWithin 14 days
Major revision by authorsWithin 30 days
Final acceptanceWithin 14 days after satisfactory revision
Copyediting and typesetting7–14 days
Author proof reviewWithin 5 working days
Online publicationAs soon as practicable after proof approval

Commitment to Timeliness and Transparency

GRPJ is committed to maintaining an efficient, fair, and transparent editorial process. Authors are kept informed at every stage of manuscript handling, and all editorial decisions are communicated promptly with clear explanations and anonymized reviewer feedback. The journal continuously monitors its editorial performance and reviews its procedures to ensure alignment with internationally recognized best practices in scholarly publishing.