Editorial and peer review process

Authors must submit their manuscripts via the OJS. The step-by-step online workflow ensures:

• Metadata capture (title, abstract, keywords, ORCID iD, funding)
• Agreement to ethical and open-access policies
• Uploading of anonymized manuscript and supplementary files
• System-generated submission acknowledgment

 

Enclosed authors will find a description about the editorial workflow and review process at our journal briefly summarized. The duration of the review process can vary depending on e. g. reviewer availability. Members of the editorial board or Managing Editors are permitted to submit their own papers to the journal. In cases where an author is associated with the journal, they will be removed from all editorial tasks for that paper and another member of the Managing editor team will be assigned responsibility for overseeing peer review.

Initial Screening (Within 7 Days)

Conducted by the Managing Editor and overseen by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC), the initial check ensures:

• Relevance to dual higher education
• Compliance with formatting and anonymization
• Ethical soundness (using plagiarism detection tools)
• Completeness of submission

Reviewer Assignment (~1 Week Post-Screening)

• A Managing Editor handles the submitted manuscript
• Usually two (occasionally three) reviewers are selected based on expertise and lack of conflict of interest
• Authors may be invited to recommend or ask for the exclusion of specific individuals from the peer review process. The ESJ DHE journal does not guarantee to use these suggestions.
• Invitations are sent with 3–4 week deadlines to reviewers
• Double-blind confidentiality is enforced. Meaning that authors and reviewers do not know each other's identities during the review process.
• OJS tracks invitations, acceptances, and deadlines

Peer Review (~4 Weeks)

• Reviewers assess originality, methodology, clarity, significance, and ethical compliance
• Recommendations: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, Reject
• Reviews must be constructive and confidential
• Reviewers are asked to provide formative feedback, even if an article is not deemed suitable for publication in the journal.
• COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers apply

Editorial Decision & Revisions (2–4 Weeks)

• Managing Editor synthesizes reviewer input and drafts decision letter
• Final decision made by Editor-in-Chief (EIC)
• Authors receive detailed feedback and deadlines
• Minor Revisions: ~2 weeks
• Major Revisions: ~4 weeks
• Revised manuscripts must include a point-by-point response letter

Acceptance (~1 Week)

• Formal notification issued by the EIC
• If applicable, APC invoice and publication agreement are sent
• Manuscripts are scheduled for the next available issue (June or December)

Copyediting (~1–2 Weeks)

• Language polishing, style enforcement, citation consistency
• Authors must approve final copyedited version

Layout & Proofing (~1 Week)

• Final typesetting in PDF (and HTML/XML where applicable)
• Authors review proofs within 3–7 days
• Only minor, non-substantive corrections are allowed at this stage

 Publication & Indexing

• Final versions are published on the OJS platform
• All articles receive DOIs via CrossRef
• Intention of indexing in Scopus, DOAJ, and other databases
• Metadata disseminated via OAI-PMH for discoverability

 Ethical Compliance and COPE Adherence

• Conflicts of Interest: Managing editors and reviewers must recuse themselves from biased situations
• Research Misconduct: Allegations are investigated following COPE flowcharts
• Appeals and Complaints: Transparent and fair process led by the Editor-in-chief (EIC) and editorial board
• Post-Publication: Corrections, retractions, and expression of concern are issued as needed

 Transparency & Metrics

• Annual reports on acceptance rates, review times, and processing statistics
• Policies published openly on the journal website
• All stages logged and traceable in OJS to ensure accountability