JELLL seeks to publish empirical, conceptual, and methodological articles in the fields of English Language, Literature and Linguistics.
The journal uses a double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author’s identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. To facilitate this, authors need to ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in a way that does not disclose any aspect of their identity. To comply with this requirement, please ensure the following when submitting to the journal:
Submit the Title Page containing the Authors’ details and a Blinded Manuscript with no author details included as 2 separate files.
After a paper is submitted to the journal, the journal editor / managing editor screens the manuscript to generate a plagiarism report using Turnitin. If the manuscript complies with the journal’s requirements and plagiarism is below the 15% threshold, the managing editor sends invitations to individuals who he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. If a paper does not fulfil the journal’s criteria, the managing editor shall reject the submission.
Potential reviewers consider the invitation in light of their individual expertise, potential areas of conflict of interest, and issues of availability. Following this, they may accept or decline to review a particular submission. If possible, when declining, a reviewer is encouraged to recommend alternative reviewers. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further review. Otherwise, the reviewer shall continue to review the paper several times, taking notes so as to conduct a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else, with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before being reconsidered for publication.
Lastly, members of the editorial board of the journal shall consider the peer reviewers’ reports and make the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication. If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the handling editor is encouraged to include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. At this point, reviewers should also be sent an e-mail inform them of the outcome of their review.